OF THE PROSECUTOR Whitfield’s second issue complains that the trial court erred when it denied his Sixth Amendment right to confrontation by refusing to allow Whitfield to cross-examine the prosecutor at the speedy trial hearing concerning the State’s reasons for the delay. Nonetheless, Whitfield did not properly preserve his complaint. To preserve a complaint for appellate review, a party must have presented to the trial court a timely objection that states the specific grounds for the desired ruling, if they are not apparent from the context of the objection. Tex.R.App. P. 33.1(a). Whitfield did not raise the confrontation clause issue in his objection before the trial court, but raised it for the first time on appeal. Paredes v. State, 129 S.W.3d 530, 536 (Tex.Crim.App.2004) (<HOLDING>). Whitfield has not preserved error on this
holding that failure to raise an issue in an opening brief waives that issue holding that the failure to raise an issue in the opening brief waives the issue holding that an objection raised in a motion to suppress evidence preserves the issue for appeal despite the lack of further objection at trial holding failure to assert an objection based upon the confrontation clause at trial waives the issue for appeal holding that although a defendant filed a motion in limine on an evidentiary issue a failure to object to the evidence at trial waives the issue for appeal