FERNANDEZ v. STATE (2019)

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

These are consolidated pro se appeals from district court orders denying a motion to modify sentence filed in three district court cases.¹ Fifth Judicial District Court, Nye County; Robert W. Lane, Judge.

Appellant requested that his sentences be modified to run concurrently because he had learned from his mistakes.² We conclude that the district court did not err in denying the July 25, 2018, motion because appellant failed to allege or demonstrate the sentencing court relied on mistaken assumptions regarding his criminal record that worked to his extreme detriment. See Edwards v. State, 112 Nev. 704, 708, 918 P.2d 321, 324 (1996). Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Having considered the pro se brief filed by appellant, we conclude that a response is not necessary. NRAP 46A(c). These appeals therefore have been submitted for decision based on the pro se brief and the record. See NRAP 34(f)(3).

2.   In his brief, appellant makes several arguments related to the charging documents and the bond amount. These arguments were not raised in the motion filed below, and thus, we decline to consider them.