Opinion filed July 13, 2006

                                                                        In The

    Eleventh Court of Appeals

                                                                 ____________

                                                          No. 11-05-00322-CR

                                                    __________

                                  ROBBY LYNN FOLSOM, Appellant

                                                             V.

                                        STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

                                          On Appeal from the 90th District Court

                                                       Stephens County, Texas

                                                    Trial Court Cause No. 29992

                                                                   O P I N I O N

The trial court convicted Robby Lynn Folsom, upon his plea of guilty, of theft.   A plea bargain agreement as to punishment was not entered.  The State did agree not to pursue two other cases against appellant.  After a presentence investigation report was prepared, the trial court sentenced him to confinement for a term of sixteen months and a fine of $1,000.  We affirm.

                                                      Issue Presented

In his sole issue on appeal, appellant argues that his sentence Aviolated his rights@ as guaranteed under U.S. Const. amend. VIII and Tex. Const. art. I, ' 13 because the  sentence Ais disproportionate to his crime.@  Specifically, appellant contends that sixteen months is a Agrossly disproportionate sentence@ for his part in the offense.

                                                                  Applicable Law

The Eighth Amendment prohibits punishments that are Agrossly disproportionate@ to the offense for which the defendant has been convicted.  Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957 (1991);  McGruder v. Puckett, 954 F.2d 313 (5th Cir. 1992); Bradfield v. State, 42 S.W.3d 350 (Tex. App.CEastland 2001, pet. ref=d); Hicks v. State, 15 S.W.3d 626 (Tex. App.C Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref=d); Hernandez v. State, 10 S.W.3d 812 (Tex. App.CBeaumont 2000, pet. ref=d); Dunn v. State, 997 S.W.2d 885 (Tex. App.CWaco 1999, pet. ref=d); Jackson v. State, 989 S.W.2d 842 (Tex. App.CTexarkana 1999, no pet.).  The reviewing court must first compare the gravity of the offense with the severity of the sentence.  Bradfield, 42 S.W.3d at 353.

                                                              Evidence Presented

Appellant executed a written judicial confession admitting that he committed the offense of theft as alleged in the indictment.  In open court, the trial court admonished appellant and accepted his plea of guilty to the offense.

At the punishment phase, the State introduced the statement of Tracey Ann Folsom, appellant=s wife.  Tracey also testified on behalf of appellant.  Both in her statement and in open court, Tracey said that she and her brother stole the toolbox containing micrometers and other tools.  In her statement, Tracey said , A[Appellant] didn=t know anything about the burglary until we [Tracey and her brother] showed up at the house.@  During cross-examination at the hearing, Tracey first testified that appellant did not know that the toolbox had been stolen.  When confronted with her prior written statement, Tracey testified that appellant Aprobably assumed@ the toolbox was stolen and that she Aguess[ed]@ he knew that the toolbox was stolen.

Homer J. Brown testified that Tracey had told him about some tools they were selling for rent money.  Brown talked to appellant about buying the tools, and the tools were at appellant=s house. Brown purchased two sets of micrometer calipers for his father.

Brown testified that Tracey=s father unlocked the door to Tracey and appellant=s bedroom, pulled the toolbox out from underneath their bed, and took the items out of the box.  Brown took the micrometers to his father who decided to purchase them.  Brown=s father wrote a receipt for the items; appellant signed the receipt; and Brown gave appellant the money.  The State introduced the receipt into evidence.

                                                                Sentence Assessed

The record does not reflect that the sentence is Agrossly disproportionate@ to the offense.  Appellant admitted that he did Aunlawfully appropriate, by acquiring or otherwise exercising control over@ the property in question as alleged in the indictment.  Brown testified that appellant discussed the sale of the micrometers and that appellant signed the receipt.

The trial court assessed a sentence that was within the range of punishment authorized by Tex. Pen. Code Ann. ' 12.35 (Vernon 2003).^[1]   A penalty assessed within the range of punishment established by the legislature will not be disturbed on appeal.  Jackson v. State, 680 S.W.2d 809 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984); Bradfield, 42 S.W.2d at 354.  Appellant=s issue is overruled.

                                                                                    This Court=s Ruling

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

BOB DICKENSON

SENIOR JUSTICE

July 13, 2006

Do not publish.  See Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of:  Wright, C.J., and

Strange, J., and Dickenson, S.J.^[2]