Harvey v. State
This text of 925 So. 2d 1111 (Harvey v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
William HARVEY, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
STRINGER, Judge.
William Harvey appeals the summary denial of his motion for DNA evidence examination filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.853. We affirm the postconviction court's denial of the motion because it is facially insufficient. Our affirmance is without prejudice to any right Harvey might have to file a timely, *1112 facially sufficient rule 3.853 motion. See Scarborough v. State, 906 So.2d 379 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005).
Affirmed.
KELLY and WALLACE, JJ., Concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
925 So. 2d 1111, 2006 WL 1143584, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harvey-v-state-fladistctapp-2006.