particular punishment.” Thus, the issue of punishment is “one for the legislative branch, and legislative discretion is deferred to unless the sentence imposed shocks the conscience.” In the case sub judice, the trial court sentenced Pepe-Frazier to life for his commission of aggravated child molestation, (725 SE2d 236) (2012) (noting that “a constitutional attack on a sentencing statute should normally be made no later than the sentencing hearing, at a time when corrective action is still possible” and that, because appellant “failed to raise his constitutional challenges at the first available opportunity during the sentencing hearing” and instead “first raised [them] in his amended motion for new trial,” his challenges were untimely and not subject to review). 29 See id. at 674 (3) (<HOLDING>). 30 OCGA § 16-6-4 (d) (1). 31 Adams v. State,
holding that where trial counsel was not ineffective appellate counsel was not ineffective for failing to raise claim of ineffectiveness of trial counsel holding that constitutional claim that paternity suit should not be barred by statute of limitations is waived by failing to raise the issue before the trial court holding that the defendant waived an argument by failing to raise it in his appellants brief holding that because appellant had waived review of constitutional challenge to sentencing statute by failing to raise it at the first opportunity the trial court correctly proceeded to examine whether the appellants trial counsel was ineffective for failing to raise constitutional challenges to the sentencing statutes holding the appellant waived the issue of return of property by failing to raise it following trial or sentencing for the underlying crimes