Court Opinion

ID: 7689402
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-30 18:34:07.19107+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:26:39.920871
License: Public Domain

W. SHARP, Judge,
concurring specially.
In order to forestall Lockett from filing a fifth or sixth rule 3.850 motion, we should affirm the trial court’s denial of this, his fourth motion, because it is successive and improper. Stewart v. State, 632 So.2d 59 (Fla.1993); Zeigler v. State, 632 So.2d 48 (Fla.1993), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 115 S.Ct. 104, 130 L.Ed.2d 52 (1994); Foster v. State, 614 So.2d 455 (Fla.1992), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 114 S.Ct. 398, 126 L.Ed.2d 346 (1993); Davis v. State, 589 So.2d 896 (Fla.1991); Isley v. State, 652 So.2d 409 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Johnson v. State, 652 So.2d 980 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). Enough is enough.