AFFIRMED as MODIFIED and Opinion Filed October 29, 2018 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals 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, F rancis, and Lang-Miers Opinion by Justice Bridges John Anthony Leonard appeals his two aggravated robbery convict ions 1 in cause numbers 05-17-01480-CR and 05-17-01481-CR. In two issues, appellant ar gues the judgment in each case should be modified to reflect the correct name of the defense a ttorney who represented him at the underlying adjudication hearing. As modified, we affirm the tr ial court’s judgments. In October 2011, appellant was indicted on two charges of aggra vated robbery with a deadly weapon. In August 2012, appellant entered a guilty plea to each charge, and the trial court placed appellant on deferred adj udication community supervision for ten years. In October 2017, the State filed a motion to adjudicate appellant’s guilt in eac h case. Appellant pleaded true to the

1 In his judicial confession, appe llant confessed to an aggravat ed assault conviction in June 2008.–2– 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 shoul d be modified to correctly name his defense attorney. The S tate agrees that the judgments are incorrect and should be modified. This Court has the power to modify a judgment to mak e the record speak the truth when we have the necessary information to do so. T EX
. R. A PP
. 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 identif ies appellant’s attorney as “ Bill Ash.” The record reflects that appellant’s attorney was “Bill Ashe II.” We sustain appel lant’s two issues. We modify the judgment in each case to reflect that “Bill Ashe II” was appell ant’s attorney in each case. As modified, we affirm the trial court’s judgments.

Do Not Publish T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47.2(b)
171480F.U05 /David L. Bridges/ DAVID L. BRIDGES JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
JOHN ANTHONY LEONARD, Appellant
No. 05-17-01480-CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 6, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F11-60173-X. Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges. Justices Francis and Lang-Miers participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of t his date, the judgment of the trial court is MODIFIED as follows: following "Attorney for Defendan t:" "Bill Ashe II" is substitut ed. As REFORMED , the judgment is AFFIRMED

. Judgment entered October 29, 2018.–4– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
JOHN ANTHONY LEONARD, Appellant
No. 05-17-01481-CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 6, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F11-59713-X. Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges. Justices Francis and Lang-Miers participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of t his date, the judgment of the trial court is MODIFIED as follows: following "Attorney for Defendan t:" "Bill Ashe II" is substitut ed. As REFORMED , the judgment is AFFIRMED

. Judgment entered October 29, 2018.