Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed October 16, 2024.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D23-2130 Lower Tribunal No. F06-29278B ________________

Will Utile, Appellant, vs. The State of Florida, Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Ramiro C. Areces, Judge.

Will Utile, in proper person.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Richard L. Polin, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before SCALES, LINDSEY, and MILLER, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

“A motion to correct illegal sentence under rule 3.800(a) is not cognizable where, as here, the defendant seeks to challenge the validity of the conviction and, only by extension, the ‘legality’ of the resulting sentence.”

Ramirez v. State, 374 So. 3d 71, 72 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022). Although the instant challenge is to the sufficiency of evidence to support the revocation of probation as opposed to the original “conviction,” the same principles apply. See Prince v. State, 903 So. 2d 1068, 1069 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (holding that an attack on the sufficiency of the evidence for the probation revocation is not cognizable in a rule 3.800(a) motion).

Affirmed.