Roper (William) v. State ( 2014 )

 illegal sentence. 2 See Edwards, 112 Nev. at 708, 918 P.2d at 324.
Therefore, without considering the merits of any of the claims raised in
the motion, we conclude that the district court did not err in denying the
motion. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
Pickering
P debt tar
' J.
ras,
J.
"1/4447
P arraguirr
7- ,
Saitta
cc: Hon. Kathleen E. Delaney, District Judge
William Eugene Roper
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney
Eighth District Court Clerk
2 Appellant's complaint about the presentence investigation report
did not relate to his criminal record. Even had the claim related to his
criminal record, appellant failed to demonstrate that the district court
relied upon a material mistake of fact about his criminal record that
worked to his extreme detriment. See Edwards v. State, 112 Nev. 704,
708, 918 P.2d 321, 324 (1996). The information in the presentence
investigation report appears to have come from the police report. At trial,
the victim testified that a stun gun was used. While the victim never
testified that appellant had punched her in the face, the victim did testify
that she fought and struggled during the kidnapping and robbery.
Appellant addressed the court personally at sentencing and indicated that
he had not punched the victim in the face.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(C9 1.947A