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 for one count of aggravated assault upon a peace officer with a deadly weapon and one count of resisting, evading, or obstructing an officer. The State presented evidence that during a chase, the Defendant pulled out a knife and held it in front of her face in a manner that suggested willingness to use it against the pursuing officer, which scared the officer. Additionally, despite the Defendant's assertion of unawareness, evidence was presented that she knew the officer was attempting to apprehend or arrest her, as indicated by her actions of fleeing and yelling obscenities after the officer's attempt to use a Taser on her and commands to stop (paras 3-4).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that there was insufficient evidence to support the convictions for aggravated assault upon a peace officer with a deadly weapon and for resisting, evading, or obstructing an officer. The Defendant acknowledged the facts presented by the State but maintained that these did not suffice for the convictions (paras 2-4).
• Plaintiff-Appellee: Maintained that the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to support the Defendant's convictions. The State's evidence included the Defendant's threatening gesture with a knife towards the officer and her actions indicating awareness of the officer's intent to apprehend or arrest her (paras 3-4).

Legal Issues

• Whether there was sufficient evidence to support the Defendant's convictions for one count of aggravated assault upon a peace officer with a deadly weapon and one count of resisting, evading, or obstructing an officer.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the Defendant's convictions for one count of aggravated assault upon a peace officer with a deadly weapon and one count of resisting, evading, or obstructing an officer (para 6).

Reasons

• Per LINDA M. VANZI, Chief Judge (JULIE J. VARGAS, Judge, and DANIEL J. GALLEGOS, Judge, concurring): The Court was unpersuaded by the Defendant's argument that there was insufficient evidence to support her convictions. The Court highlighted the Defendant's acknowledgment of the facts presented by the State, including her threatening behavior with a knife and actions indicating her awareness of the officer's intent to apprehend or arrest her. The Court emphasized that the evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the guilty verdicts, resolving all conflicts and indulging all permissible inferences in favor of the verdict. The Court concluded that there was sufficient evidence to support both of the Defendant's convictions, affirming the jury's verdicts (paras 1-6).