Case Name: Adam JOLLY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2013-01-30
Citations: 106 So. 3d 508
Docket Number: No. 4D11-1812
Parties: Adam JOLLY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: POLEN, GROSS and CONNER, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 106
Pages: 508–508

Head Matter:
Adam JOLLY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 4D11-1812.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Jan. 30, 2013.
Adam Jolly, Indiantown, pro se.
No appearance required for appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the denial of appellant's untimely post-conviction motion. A petition for writ of habeas corpus may not be used as a substitute for a rule 3.850 motion. See Baker v. State, 878 So.2d 1236, 1241 (Fla.2004); Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(Z). As to appellant's claim that the sentencing court believed that it was required to sentence appellant to the statutory maximum once it concluded that he was a habitual felony offender, see Burdick v. State, 594 So.2d 267 (Fla.1992), appellant fails to show manifest injustice that merits relaxing the pro-eedural bars. Cf. Johnson v. State, 9 So.3d 640 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009); Prince v. State, 98 So.3d 768 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012).
Affirmed.
POLEN, GROSS and CONNER, JJ., concur.