CLIFFORD H. WASHBURN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
CLIFFORD H. WASHBURN, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
805 So. 2d 1057
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2002)
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The appellant’s motion, filed pursuant to rule 3.800(a), is facially insufficient to demonstrate entitlement to relief, and we therefore affirm the summary denial of this claim. See State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429 (Fla.1998); Baker v. State, 714 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). However, this affirmance is without prejudice to the appellant’s right to refile a facially sufficient motion under rule 3.800, if he is able to do so. The present denial will not stand as a bar to a successive motion raising these claims. See Tranquille v. State, 747 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999).
AFFIRMED.
BOOTH, BARFIELD, and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 1998)
- Williamson v. Penni Lane Williamson, 714 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)
- Baker v. State, 714 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- Tranquille v. State, 747 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)