Nixon v. Wilkins

Missouri Court of Appeals

Nixon v. Wilkins

164 S.W.3d 1, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 91, 2005 WL 89027

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 18, 2005

DocketNo. ED 84899

StatusPublished

This text of 164 S.W.3d 1 (Nixon v. Wilkins) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Nixon v. Wilkins, 164 S.W.3d 1, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 91, 2005 WL 89027 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM DECISION

PER CURIAM.

Johnnie Ray Nixon (relator) filed a petition for a writ of mandamus to compel Robert Wilkins, Prosecuting Attorney of Jefferson County (respondent), to provide relator with his criminal file pursuant to Sections 610.010-027 RSMo. The circuit court of Jefferson County dismissed the petition for failure to state a claim. Relator appeals pro se.

In reviewing the trial court’s dismissal of the petition for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, the sole issue to be decided is whether, after allowing the pleading its broadest intendment, treating all facts alleged as true and construing all allegations favorable to plaintiffs, the averments invoke principles of substantive law entitling the petitioner to relief. Lowrey v. Horvath, 689 S.W.2d 625, 626 (Mo. banc 1985). Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy effective to compel performance of a particular act by one who has an unequivocal duty to perform the act. State ex inf. Riederer v. Collins, 799 S.W.2d 644, 646 (Mo.App.1990). A petitioner must show that the right sought to be enforced is clearly established and presently existing. Id.

We have reviewed the petition and determined that the trial court did not err in determining that it failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

MEMORANDUM DECISION

PER CURIAM.

Johnnie Ray Nixon (relator) filed a petition for a writ of mandamus to compel Robert Wilkins, Prosecuting Attorney of Jefferson County (respondent), to provide relator with his criminal file pursuant to Sections 610.010-027 RSMo. The circuit court of Jefferson County dismissed the petition for failure to state a claim. Relator appeals pro se.

In reviewing the trial court’s dismissal of the petition for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, the sole issue to be decided is whether, after allowing the pleading its broadest intendment, treating all facts alleged as true and construing all allegations favorable to plaintiffs, the averments invoke principles of substantive law entitling the petitioner to relief. Lowrey v. Horvath, 689 S.W.2d 625, 626 (Mo. banc 1985). Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy effective to compel performance of a particular act by one who has an unequivocal duty to perform the act. State ex inf. Riederer v. Collins, 799 S.W.2d 644, 646 (Mo.App.1990). A petitioner must show that the right sought to be enforced is clearly established and presently existing. Id.

We have reviewed the petition and determined that the trial court did not err in determining that it failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

164 S.W.3d 1, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 91, 2005 WL 89027, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nixon-v-wilkins-moctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack