Case ID: sw2d_930/html/0481-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

James F. DOOLEY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent-Respondent.
    No. 70084.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
    Oct. 1, 1996.
    James F. Dooley, Pacific, pro se.
    Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, Breck K. Burgess, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jef- ' ferson City, for respondent-respondent.
    Before DOWD, P.J., and REINHARD and GARY M. GAERTNER, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner Dooley appeals from the trial court’s denial of his “NUNC PRO TUNC MOTION TO CORRECT THE ERRONEOUS PRESENTENCE INVESTIGATION REPORT AS SUBMITTED IN CASE NUMBER CR186-1508FX.” The trial court found that it lacked jurisdiction to grant the relief requested. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).