Mundo (Jonathan) v. State

Nevada Supreme Court

Mundo (Jonathan) v. State

DecidedJune 15, 2017

Docket70645

StatusUnpublished

This text of Mundo (Jonathan) v. State (Mundo (Jonathan) v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mundo (Jonathan) v. State, (Neb. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

JONATHAN WAYNE MUNDO, No. 70645 Appellant, vs. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent. JUN 15 2017 r ...1,.o‘Av t• zA nrrk A p, eviimr.ir,g19 13), ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE This is a pro se appeal from a district court order denying a motion to amend a judgment of conviction by modifying the sentences to run concurrently with a sentence in an out-of-state case. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Susan Johnson, Judge. Appellant was convicted, pursuant to a guilty plea, of conspiracy to commit robbery and robbery with the use of a deadly weapon. He was sentenced to serve consecutive terms of 12-30 months, 24-60 months, and 12-60 months. The judgment of conviction specifies that the sentences are to be served concurrently with the sentences imposed in another Nevada case (C261234) and consecutively to the sentences imposed in a California case (FWV1200604). In a motion filed on May 4, 2016, appellant sought clarification as to how the sentences imposed in this case are to be served in relationship to the sentence imposed in a second California case (FWV1202243) that is consecutive to the sentence imposed in the California case mentioned in the judgment of conviction in this case. The district court denied the motion, concluding that there was no evidence that the sentencing judge overlooked the other California case or made a clerical error. We conclude that the motion was properly denied as SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) (947A appellant did not demonstrate a clerical error that could be corrected under NRS 176.565 or a misunderstanding as to his criminal record that worked to his extreme detriment such that the sentence should be modified consistent with Edwards v. State, 112 Nev. 704, 708, 918 P.2d 321, 324 (1996). Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

.0-catt J. Hardesty

Parraguirre qr .

./ekei ,J. Stiglich

cc: Hon. Susan Johnson, District Judge Jonathan Wayne Mundo Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 101 1947A c(14114o

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

JONATHAN WAYNE MUNDO, No. 70645 Appellant, vs. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent. JUN 15 2017 r ...1,.o‘Av t• zA nrrk A p, eviimr.ir,g19 13), ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE This is a pro se appeal from a district court order denying a motion to amend a judgment of conviction by modifying the sentences to run concurrently with a sentence in an out-of-state case. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Susan Johnson, Judge. Appellant was convicted, pursuant to a guilty plea, of conspiracy to commit robbery and robbery with the use of a deadly weapon. He was sentenced to serve consecutive terms of 12-30 months, 24-60 months, and 12-60 months. The judgment of conviction specifies that the sentences are to be served concurrently with the sentences imposed in another Nevada case (C261234) and consecutively to the sentences imposed in a California case (FWV1200604). In a motion filed on May 4, 2016, appellant sought clarification as to how the sentences imposed in this case are to be served in relationship to the sentence imposed in a second California case (FWV1202243) that is consecutive to the sentence imposed in the California case mentioned in the judgment of conviction in this case. The district court denied the motion, concluding that there was no evidence that the sentencing judge overlooked the other California case or made a clerical error. We conclude that the motion was properly denied as SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) (947A appellant did not demonstrate a clerical error that could be corrected under NRS 176.565 or a misunderstanding as to his criminal record that worked to his extreme detriment such that the sentence should be modified consistent with Edwards v. State, 112 Nev. 704, 708, 918 P.2d 321, 324 (1996). Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

.0-catt J. Hardesty

Parraguirre qr .

./ekei ,J. Stiglich

cc: Hon. Susan Johnson, District Judge Jonathan Wayne Mundo Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 101 1947A c(14114o

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Mundo (Jonathan) v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mundo-jonathan-v-state-nev-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack