Shaw v. State
Shaw v. State
93 So. 3d 1120; 2012 WL 3023166; 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 12117
(Southern Reporter, Third Series)
Shaw v. State
Opinion of the Court
We affirm the denial of appellant’s rule 3.850 motion. The motion was untimely. Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850. Further, appellant’s claim is without merit. Maestas v. State, 76 So.3d 991 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.