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, Joey L. Hernandez, was involved in an altercation at the Palmside Lounge in Alamogordo, where he followed his girlfriend into the women's restroom, leading to an argument. The lounge's manager and a bouncer attempted to remove the Defendant, resulting in physical confrontations. The Defendant punched the bouncer, causing him to fall and then continued the assault. After being subdued by the manager, the Defendant brandished a knife and threatened those present. A cellphone video captured the Defendant backing towards the door with the knife as police arrived. A knife was later found in an alcove outside the bar, identified as the one used by the Defendant inside the bar (para 2).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the district court erred by denying a nondeadly force self-defense jury instruction for the charge of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, contending that brandishing the knife was a response to being struck and was intended as a signal for others to stay away, rather than an act of deadly force (paras 3-6).
• Plaintiff-Appellee: The summary does not explicitly detail the Plaintiff-Appellee's arguments in response to the Defendant-Appellant's claims.

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred in denying a nondeadly force self-defense jury instruction for the charge of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.
• Whether the aggravated assault jury instruction amounted to fundamental error.
• Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the Defendant's convictions (para 1).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the Defendant's convictions for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, tampering with evidence, and aggravated battery without great bodily harm (para 1).

Reasons

• The Court, per Judge Jennifer L. Attrep, with Judges Jacqueline R. Medina and Megan P. Duffy concurring, held that:
  The district court did not err in denying the nondeadly force self-defense jury instruction because the Defendant used deadly force when brandishing a knife, and under New Mexico law, a defendant is not entitled to a nondeadly force self-defense instruction if he used deadly force (paras 3-7).
  There was no fundamental error in the aggravated assault jury instruction because, despite the instruction's error in not requiring the jury to find the knife was a deadly weapon, the evidence presented at trial made it clear that the knife could cause death or great bodily harm, thus not affecting the fairness of the trial (paras 9-12).
  The convictions were supported by sufficient evidence, as the jury could reasonably conclude from the evidence presented that the Defendant committed the acts he was accused of, including the use of a deadly weapon, battery, and tampering with evidence (paras 13-15).