Opinion
No. 59515.
05-09-2012
Maurice JILES, Appellant, v. The STATE of Nevada, Respondent.
Maurice Jiles Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney
Maurice Jiles
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE
This is a proper person appeal from an order of the district court denying a motion to modify and/or correct an illegal sentence. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Douglas W. Herndon, Judge.
This appeal has been submitted for decision without oral argument, NRAP 34(f)(3), and we conclude that the record is sufficient for our review and briefing is unwarranted. See
In his motion, filed on September 24, 2011, appellant claimed that the presentence investigation report (PSI) contained inaccurate information regarding a 1986 shooting that appellant committed and that the district court did not make certain findings prior to sentencing him. We first note that the findings to which appellant refers are required only of federal sentencing courts. Fed.R.Crim.P. 1(a)(1), 32(i)(3)(B).
Further, appellant failed to demonstrate that the district court relied on mistaken assumptions regarding his criminal record that worked to his extreme detriment. See Edwards v. State, 112 Nev. 704, 708, 918 P.2d 321, 324 (1996). Notably, the PSI did not reference the 1986 shooting conviction, and appellant explained the unique factual circumstances when the State raised the conviction at sentencing. Moreover, although the State sought consecutive sentences of life with the possibility of parole after 10 years, appellant received concurrent sentences of 8 to 20 years. Appellant also failed to demonstrate that his sentence was facially illegal or that the district court lacked jurisdiction. See id. We therefore conclude that the district court did not err in denying appellant's motion. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
Luckett v. Warden, 91 Nev. 681, 682, 541 P.2d 910, 911 (1975).