Case Name: Johnnie Ray NIXON, Relator/Appellant, v. Robert WILKINS, Prosecuting Attorney of Jefferson County, Missouri, Respondent/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2005-01-18
Citations: 164 S.W.3d 1
Docket Number: No. ED 84899
Parties: Johnnie Ray NIXON, Relator/Appellant, v. Robert WILKINS, Prosecuting Attorney of Jefferson County, Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
Judges: Before PATRICIA L. COHEN, P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J. and ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 164
Pages: 1–2

Head Matter:
Johnnie Ray NIXON, Relator/Appellant, v. Robert WILKINS, Prosecuting Attorney of Jefferson County, Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.
No. ED 84899.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
Jan. 18, 2005.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied March 23, 2005.
Application for Transfer Denied June 21, 2005.
Johnnie Ray Nixon, Mineral Point, MO, pro se.
Cynthia R. Carle, Hillsboro, MO, for respondent.
Before PATRICIA L. COHEN, P.J., KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, J. and ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., J.

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).