State v. Cortez, 122 So. 3d 588

On Dec. 2, 2011, Jaime Cortez got into a fight at the J & B Lounge after being punched and knocked down by Bo Ballard; Cortez left and returned ~15–20 minutes later armed with a knife.
Cortez forced his way into the bar, stabbing/cutting several people who tried to disarm him; victims included Jack Trim (deep arm/arterial wound), James Lowery (stabbed in abdomen requiring surgery), Hilton Ramsey (arm injury), and Burley Osborne (knee injury).
Ballard knocked Cortez unconscious during the melee; Cortez was later found unconscious under a trailer; the knife and his bloody clothes were not recovered.
Cortez was tried on two counts of attempted second-degree murder and three counts of aggravated battery (plus related charges/amendments). The jury returned responsive verdicts: attempted manslaughter (for Ballard), aggravated battery (for Lowery), aggravated battery convictions as charged for Trim and Ramsey, and simple battery for Osborne.
Sentences (served concurrently): 14 years hard labor (attempted manslaughter), 9, 7, and 5 years hard labor on aggravated battery counts, and 5 months jail for simple battery; restitution ordered. Cortez appealed, raising sufficiency of evidence (intent) and ineffective-assistance claims.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for attempted manslaughter (Ballard)	State: evidence (witnesses + surveillance) shows Cortez specifically intended to kill Ballard and committed overt acts in furtherance	Cortez: State failed to prove specific intent to kill because Ballard was not harmed and Cortez did not state intent	Held: Affirmed — viewing evidence in light most favorable to prosecution, jury could infer specific intent to kill from his conduct and videotape; conviction upheld
Bill of information wording (included “inflict great bodily harm”) — ineffective assistance	State: bill need only give fair notice; jury instructions properly defined required intent	Cortez: counsel ineffective for failing to object to erroneous phrasing in bill that misstated required intent	Held: No prejudice — bill fairly informed defendant, jury received correct instructions repeatedly, so no ineffective assistance
Jury instruction — omission of attempted manslaughter definition / counsel ineffective	State: trial transcript (supplemented) shows the attempted manslaughter definition was given	Cortez: counsel ineffective for not securing or objecting to inclusion of that definition	Held: No merit — record shows the instruction was given, so no ineffective assistance

Hudson v. Louisiana, 450 U.S. 40 (1981) (acquittal may follow if evidence insufficient under Jackson standard)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
State v. Hearold, 603 So.2d 731 (La. 1992) (applying Jackson standard in Louisiana)
State v. Bishop, 835 So.2d 434 (La. 2003) (specific intent to kill required for attempted second-degree murder)
State v. Cavazos, 610 So.2d 127 (La. 1992) (defect in indictment/bill of information does not warrant reversal absent failure to give fair notice)
State v. Glover, 106 So.3d 129 (La. App. 2d Cir.) (attempted manslaughter requires specific intent to kill and overt act)