Jeremiah Jermaine Johnson v. the State of Texas

In the
Court of Appeals
Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-25-00034-CR

JEREMIAH JERMAINE JOHNSON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 202nd District Court
Bowie County, Texas
Trial Court No. 24F0147-202

Before Stevens, C.J., van Cleef and Rambin, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Stevens
MEMORANDUM OPINION

Jeremiah Jermaine Johnson pled guilty to failure to register as a sex offender before a

Bowie County jury, which convicted him of the offense. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN.

art. 62.102(b)(2). After a punishment trial to the bench, the trial court sentenced Johnson to ten

years’ imprisonment.

In his sole point of error on appeal, Johnson argues that his trial counsel rendered

ineffective assistance “due to a chain of events leading to defendant introducing evidence

unfavorable to his case.” We have fully addressed this point in our opinion in cause number 06-

25-00033-CR, in which Johnson appeals his conviction for indecency with a child by sexual

contact. For the reasons stated therein, we likewise conclude here that a silent record does not

support Johnson’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, and we overrule his sole point of

error.

Even so, our appellate record reflects that Johnson pled guilty to failing to register as a

sex offender and that punishment was assessed by the trial court. The trial court’s judgment

mistakenly states that Johnson pled not guilty to the offense and that the jury assessed

punishment. The judgment also mistakenly states that the statute of offense is found in the Texas

Penal Code instead of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. As a result, we modify the trial

court’s judgment to reflect Johnson’s plea of guilty, that punishment was assessed by the trial

2
court instead of the jury, and that the correct statute of offense is Article 62.102(b)(2) of the

Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.1

As modified, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Scott E. Stevens
Chief Justice

Date Submitted: September 23, 2025
Date Decided: October 17, 2025

Do Not Publish

1
“This Court has the power to correct and modify the judgment of the trial court for accuracy when the necessary
data and information are part of the record.” Anthony v. State, 531 S.W.3d 739, 743 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2016,
no pet.) (citing TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(b); Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Asberry v. State,
813 S.W.2d 526, 529 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d) (en banc)). “The authority of an appellate court to reform
incorrect judgments is not dependent upon the request of any party, nor does it turn on the question of whether a
party has or has not objected in the trial court.” Id. (quoting Asberry, 813 S.W.2d at 529–30).
3