AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The Defendant was convicted of multiple counts of aggravated assault on a peace officer and one count of aggravated fleeing a law enforcement officer. The appeal focuses on the challenge to the evidence presented regarding one victim's status as a law enforcement officer and the convictions arising from these charges.

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the State failed to present sufficient evidence regarding one victim’s status as a law enforcement officer and opposed the affirmance of his remaining convictions.
• Plaintiff-Appellee: Initially supported the affirmance of all convictions but later filed a notice not intending to oppose the Court’s proposed reversal of the Defendant's conviction on one count of aggravated assault on a peace officer.

Legal Issues

• Whether the State presented sufficient evidence regarding one victim’s status as a law enforcement officer in one of the aggravated assault charges.
• Whether the district court erred in affirming the Defendant's remaining convictions.

Disposition

• Reversed and vacated Defendant’s conviction with regard to Count 2 of aggravated assault on a peace officer.
• Affirmed the judgment and sentence of the district court with regard to Defendant’s remaining convictions.

Reasons

• Per HANISEE, Chief Judge (ATTREP, J., and HENDERSON, J., concurring):
  The Court initially proposed to affirm all convictions but reconsidered one conviction of aggravated assault on a peace officer after the Defendant's opposition, highlighting the State's failure to present evidence on one victim's status as a law enforcement officer (para 1). Upon review, and with the State not opposing the Court's proposed reversal on this count, the Court decided to reverse and vacate the conviction related to Count 2. However, the Court remained unpersuaded by the Defendant's arguments against his remaining convictions and affirmed those, citing reasons discussed in the second notice of proposed summary disposition (paras 1-2).