82 . 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). 83 . Id. at 686, 104 S.Ct. 2052. 84 . Id. at 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052. 85 . Id. at 688, 104 S.Ct. 2052. 86 . Id. at 689, 104 S.Ct. 2052 (alteration in original). 87 . Id. 88 . Id. 89 . Id. (quoting Michel v. Louisiana, 350 U.S. 91, 101, 76 S.Ct. 158, 100 L.Ed. 83 (1955)). 90 . Id. at 690, 104 S.Ct. 2052. 91 . Id. 92 . Id. at 691, 104 S.Ct. 2052. 93 . Id. at 693, 104 S.Ct. 2052. 94 . Id. 95 . Id. 96 . Id. at 694, 104 S.Ct. 2052. 97 . Id. 98 . Id. at 696, 104 S.Ct. 2052. 99 .Id. 100 . See Tex.R. Civ. P. 279. 101 . Strickland, 466 U.S. at 699, 104 S.Ct. 2052 (quoting Michel v. Louisiana, 350 U.S. 91, 101, 76 S.Ct. 158, 100 L.Ed. 83 (1955)). 102 .See United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 731-32, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) (<HOLDING>); Pondexter v. State, 942 S.W.2d 577, 588
holding that appellate court may only review issues actually presented to and considered by the trial court holding pursuant to rule 885 that an appellate court is not required to reach a double jeopardy issue that was not brought in the trial court holding that an appellate court cannot consider an issue that was not preserved for appellate review holding that a plain error that affects substantial rights may be considered even though it was not objected to or brought to the courts attention holding that under federal rule of appellate procedure 52b plain error in a jury charge may be considered by an appellate court although it was not brought to the attention of the trial court