Leonard Allen Hennard v. State
10-14-00324-CR
| Tex. App. | Sep 17, 2015Background
- Leonard Hennard was indicted on two counts of assault family violence: Count 1 — assault by occlusion; Count 2 — assault family violence with an enhancement paragraph.
- A jury convicted Hennard on both counts, found the enhancement true, and assessed 20 years confinement plus a $10,000 fine for each count.
- Officers and a neighbor observed red discoloration/marks on the victim Tamra Colvin’s neck and reported her statements that Hennard choked and beat her. Photographs of the injuries were introduced.
- Colvin gave inconsistent statements: initially told police Hennard choked her, later signed an affidavit of non-prosecution and testified at trial she did not remember the incident and suggested the neck marks may have been self-inflicted.
- Hennard challenged (1) the statutory references in the judgment, (2) the naming of the prosecuting attorney in the judgment, and (3–4) sufficiency of the evidence and the denial of his motion for directed verdict on the occlusion assault charge.
- The Tenth Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment in all respects.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Whether the judgment should be modified to cite specific Penal Code subsections | Hennard: judgment should list the precise subsections for occlusion and enhanced assault | State: judgment already reflects the offense and degree as required by statute | Court: Overrules; judgment sufficiently describes the offense and degree |
| 2. Whether the judgment must name the actual trial prosecutors instead of the elected DA | Hennard: judgment incorrectly names Patrick Wilson; should name trial prosecutors Ricky Sipes and Habon Mohamed | State: elected district attorney is the attorney for the State and may be named in the judgment | Court: Overrules; naming the elected DA is permissible and satisfies art. 42.01 |
| 3. Sufficiency of evidence for assault by occlusion (impeding breathing/circulation) | Hennard: evidence does not prove he intentionally/knowingly/recklessly impeded breathing or circulation | State: officers, witness testimony, photos, and victim statements support choke/occlusion | Court: Overrules; evidence—direct and circumstantial—is sufficient to support conviction |
| 4. Whether trial court erred denying directed verdict on occlusion charge | Hennard: judge should have granted directed verdict due to insufficient evidence | State: reasonable factfinder could infer guilt from cumulative evidence | Court: Overrules; directed verdict properly denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for reviewing legal sufficiency of evidence)
- Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9 (Tex. Crim. App.) (circumstantial evidence treated as probative as direct evidence)
- Lucio v. State, 351 S.W.3d 878 (Tex. Crim. App.) (discussion of sufficiency review standard)
- Conner v. State, 67 S.W.3d 192 (Tex. Crim. App.) (review includes properly and improperly admitted evidence)
- Chambers v. State, 805 S.W.2d 459 (Tex. Crim. App.) (factfinder entitled to judge witness credibility)