Furthermore, the court may consider only evidence of the conviction. Allowing other evidence violates the defendant's due process rights . Endangerment cannot support this aggravating factor as the statutory definition does not necessarily require violence, namely the exertion of physical force or an intent to harm . The defendant had previously been convicted in Texas of aggravated assault on a police officer and robbery. He was also convicted in Arizona of aggravated assault and resisting arrest.
Violence means the exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse .
Ordinarily, aggravated assault and robbery, by definition, involve the use or threat of violence. However, the Texas legislature amended the statutes to encompass reckless behavior. Similarly, it is possible to commit aggravated assault in Arizona without the use or threat of violence also, especially here, where there is no evidence of the specific subsection under which the defendant was convicted. The defendant had previously been convicted in Nevada of two counts of attempted murder with a deadly weapon. The Court must look to the statutory definition, and no other evidence, to determine if the prior convictions involved the use or threat of violence.