Opinion ID: 6536624
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Does sufficient evidence support Mr. Hopkins' conviction for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon?

Text: [¶14] When we review a criminal conviction for sufficiency of the evidence, we view the facts in the light most favorable to the State. Downs v. State , 581 P.2d 610 , 614 (Wyo. 1978). We leave out any conflicting evidence of the defendant, and draw every reasonable inference in the State's favor. Id . The question we must answer is whether a reasonable and rational jury could have convicted the defendant of the crime based upon the evidence that was presented at trial. Horn v. State , 554 P.2d 1141 , 1145 (Wyo. 1976). Guy v. State , 2008 WY 56 , ¶ 37, 184 P.3d 687 , 698 (Wyo. 2008). [¶15] Mr. Hopkins asserts his conviction for aggravated assault and battery is not supported by sufficient evidence because no evidence supports an intentional or knowing mens rea. He argues that although he drove while under the influence of a toxic substance, the State failed to show additional driving conduct to support an intentional and knowing action towards another individual. This claim has merit only if we adopt Mr. Hopkins' interpretation of the mens rea requirement under subsection (a)(ii). We rejected his interpretation for the reasons stated above. [¶16] Applying the knowingly element of Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-2-502 (a)(ii) as the legislature plainly drafted it, the jury could reasonably infer the requisite mens rea from the fact Mr. Hopkins caused bodily injury to another with his vehicle under the circumstances evidenced in this case. Mr. Hopkins testified that he knew the effects inhalants have on the brain but inhaled the air duster anyway because he had the shakes; he drove his son to school after huffing; he stopped to get more air duster from his hotel room after dropping his son off at school; he got back in his car to drive to work and possibly inhaled more air duster as he was driving; and he struck another car causing injury to its driver. This testimony alone was sufficient to prove Mr. Hopkins knowingly violated Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-2-502 (a)(ii).