cannot challenge in this appeal the trial court’s determination to proceed to an adjudication of guilt. See id. To the extent that Wright is challenging the term of punishment imposed by the trial court, that issue is not properly before us because Wright did not object or otherwise raise the alleged error in the trial court. See Tex.R.App. P. 33.1(a)(1); Mercado v. State, 718 S.W.2d 291, 296 (Tex.Crim.App.1986); see also Rodriguez v. State, 917 S.W.2d 90, 92 (Tex.App.Amarillo 1996, pet. ref d) (stating that error was not preserved for review because appellant failed to raise the severity of his sentence when punishment was assessed and failed to file a motion for new trial); Thompson v. State, No. 02-06-00440-CR, 2007 WL 3408659, at *2 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth Nov.15, 2007, pet. filed) (<HOLDING>); Davis v. State, No. 02-04-00132-CR, 2005 WL
holding complaint that sentence violated equal protection was waived because of failure to object at trial holding that appellant failed to preserve error because it did not present appellate complaint to trial court holding that defendants objection to personal jurisdiction was forfeited where defendant did not object before he entered his plea holding appellant waived his challenge to statute as vague as applied because he did not specifically object at trial holding that appellant forfeited his complaint regarding his postadjudication sentence because he did not object at trial or present his motion for new trial