AFFIRMED as MODIFIED and Opinion Filed October 29, 2018
Court of Appeals
S In The
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-17-01480-CR
No. 05-17-01481-CR
JOHN ANTHONY LEONARD, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 6
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause Nos. F11-60173-X; F11-59713-X
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Bridges, Francis, and Lang-Miers
Opinion by Justice Bridges
John Anthony Leonard appeals his two aggravated robbery convictions1 in cause numbers
05-17-01480-CR and 05-17-01481-CR. In two issues, appellant argues the judgment in each case
should be modified to reflect the correct name of the defense attorney who represented him at the
underlying adjudication hearing. As modified, we affirm the trial court’s judgments.
In October 2011, appellant was indicted on two charges of aggravated robbery with a
deadly weapon. In August 2012, appellant entered a guilty plea to each charge, and the trial court
placed appellant on deferred adjudication community supervision for ten years. In October 2017,
the State filed a motion to adjudicate appellant’s guilt in each case. Appellant pleaded true to the
1
In his judicial confession, appellant confessed to an aggravated assault conviction in June 2008.
allegations in the motions to adjudicate. Following a hearing in December 2017, the trial court
entered judgments adjudicating appellant’s guilt and sentencing him to fifteen years’ confinement
in each case. These appeals followed.
In two issues, appellant argues the judgment in each case should be modified to correctly
name his defense attorney. The State agrees that the judgments are incorrect and should be
modified. This Court has the power to modify a judgment to make the record speak the truth when
we have the necessary information to do so. TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(b); Asberry v. State, 813 S.W.2d
526, 529 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d); Barnes v. State, No. 05-16-01184-CR, 2017 WL
5897746, at *6 (Tex. App.—Dallas Nov. 29, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for
publication).
Each judgment in this case identifies appellant’s attorney as “Bill Ash.” The record reflects
that appellant’s attorney was “Bill Ashe II.” We sustain appellant’s two issues. We modify the
judgment in each case to reflect that “Bill Ashe II” was appellant’s attorney in each case.
As modified, we affirm the trial court’s judgments.
/David L. Bridges/
DAVID L. BRIDGES
JUSTICE
Do Not Publish
TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b)
171480F.U05
–2–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
JOHN ANTHONY LEONARD, Appellant On Appeal from the Criminal District Court
No. 6, Dallas County, Texas
No. 05-17-01480-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F11-60173-X.
Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Francis and Lang-Miers
participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is MODIFIED
as follows:
following "Attorney for Defendant:" "Bill Ashe II" is substituted.
As REFORMED, the judgment is AFFIRMED.
Judgment entered October 29, 2018.
–3–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
JOHN ANTHONY LEONARD, Appellant On Appeal from the Criminal District Court
No. 6, Dallas County, Texas
No. 05-17-01481-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F11-59713-X.
Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Francis and Lang-Miers
participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is MODIFIED
as follows:
following "Attorney for Defendant:" "Bill Ashe II" is substituted.
As REFORMED, the judgment is AFFIRMED.
Judgment entered October 29, 2018.
–4–