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 by a jury of one count of aggravated battery against a household member with a deadly weapon.

Procedural History

• Appeal from the District Court of Curry County, Fred Travis Van Soelen, District Judge: Convicted of aggravated battery against a household member with a deadly weapon.

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant: Argued that the evidence against him was too incredible for a rational fact-finder to rely on, essentially challenging the credibility of the Victim's testimony and the consistency of the evidence presented against him.
• Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to support the conviction of aggravated battery against a household member with a deadly weapon.
• Whether concerns of weight and credibility of the Victim's testimony are within the scope of appellate review.
• Whether the district court's judgment contains a clerical error that requires correction.

Disposition

• Affirmed the Defendant's conviction for aggravated battery against a household member with a deadly weapon.
• Remanded for correction of the judgment and sentence due to a clerical error.

Reasons

• Per Michael E. Vigil, J. (M. Monica Zamora, J., and Henry M. Bohnhoff, J., concurring): The Court concluded that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction based on the jury instructions and rejected the Defendant's challenge to the credibility and consistency of the Victim's testimony, stating that such concerns are outside the scope of appellate review (paras 2-3). The Court also identified a clerical error in the judgment and sentence, which incorrectly stated the conviction as aggravated assault instead of aggravated battery, and thus remanded for correction (para 4).