What gets you 70 YEARS in Prison? The TRUTH revealed.

That was Mr. Larry Pearson Jr. of Lubbock, Texas who just spit on that cop. He doesn’t know it yet but he’s going to get 70 years in prison for what he just did.

One missed objection meant that this Defendant couldn't appeal his sentence for being "cruel and unusual punishment." This is why making the right objections at trial can make a world of difference.

To put that into perspective, 70 years ago was 1954. In 1954, gas was 0.29 cents a gallon, the drip coffee maker was just invented, Hawaii and Alaska weren’t even states yet, and the Korean war had just ended.

Have you ever wondered just how crucial precise legal language and specific objections are in court?

Imagine facing that 70-year prison sentence and finding out (too late) that a technicality prevents you from challenging it on appeal for failure to make a very specific objection.

Today, we're diving into Mr. Pearson’s case to uncover exactly how critical it is to know and apply these legal nuances, especially if you’re considering representing yourself.

The Conviction of Mr. Pearson

Mr. Pearson was prosecuted for harassment of a public servant, after he spat on police officers during an investigation for D.V.
However, despite harassment of a public servant having a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison, Mr. Pearson was sentenced to an astonishing 70 years.

That’s right. 70 years for spitting on a police officer.

The severity of this sentence raises eyebrows, but it’s the legal battles that followed which provide crucial lessons on the importance of specific legal arguments in trial and appeals.

What went wrong
As you can see, Mr. Pearson was involved in a high-tension incident with law enforcement, during which he was accused of spitting at officers and resisting arrest.

At trial, the prosecution presented this video evidence and the testimony of the officers involved, painting Pearson as a habitual offender, which significantly impacted the harshness of his sentence. You see, Mr. Pearson had previously been convicted of 2 other felonies.
Mr. Pearson filed an Appeal, where he challenged the severity of his sentence, arguing it was grossly disproportionate and thus violated the Eighth Amendment.

The Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, and excessive prison sentences have been deemed cruel and unusual.
However, here’s where the root of our discussion lies: the appellate court determined that Mr. Pearson was prohibited from arguing that his punishment violated the Eighth Amendment because of something that he didn’t do at trial.

Why preserving error matters

In order to complain about an error in the trial court on appeal, you must first make your objection to the trial court for most issues.
Think of it this way: If you’re complaining that a mistake was made by the trial court, you must first give the trial court an opportunity to fix their mistake.

This is known as “preserving error.”

We’ll cover the ways that you can preserve error if you’re representing yourself here in a minute.

Mr. Pearson made some objections to the trial court, but they were very broad complaints about the law and evidence.

Mr. Pearson made no specific objections about the punishment being excessive, cruel or unusual, or a violation of his Eighth Amendment rights.
This procedural oversight meant that the appellate court would not consider whether his sentence was constitutionally excessive.

Whether or not he would have won on an Eighth Amendment argument is debatable since the range of punishment for Mr. Pearson was a minimum of 25 years and a maximum of 99 years.

This is where it is important for you to know all of the technical legal jargon so that way you can preserve error for appeal if you’re representing yourself.

How to Properly Preserve Error

As you can see, knowing how to properly preserve error doesn’t just mean the difference between winning and losing, but it also means getting the opportunity to determine whether you win or lose. Here are your 3 key points to success:

Understand Legal Standards: Knowing the standards that apply, like those under the Eighth Amendment for cruel and unusual punishment, is crucial.

However, this applies to far more than just excessive punishment
objections. Sometimes, the evidence that is offered at trial is inadmissible because it violates a Rule of Evidence.

Chapters:
00:00 – Police confrontation
00:11 – 70 Years in Prison
01:01 – The Conviction of Mr. Pearson
01:32 – What went wrong
02:33 – Why preserving error matters
03:36 – How to Properly Preserve Error
05:25 – Know Your Rights

Also find our content on:
Facebook.com/MatthewHarrisLaw
Instagram - @MatthewHarrisLaw
Google Maps – https://g.page/MatthewHarrisLaw
Website - https://matthewharrislaw.com/

Music:
Yung Logos – El Secreto
Music provided via YouTube Studio Audio Library

Anno Domini Beats – Dark Tranquility
Music provided via YouTube Studio Audio Library