Full text
Tardrick Holiday v. The State of Florida
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed January 3, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D23-1851 Lower Tribunal No. F97-27421 ________________
Tardrick Holiday, 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, Michelle Delancy, Judge.
Tardrick Holiday, in proper person.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Kayla Heather McNab, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before LOGUE, C.J., and EMAS and BOKOR, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Cox v. State, 221 So. 3d 723, 725 n. 5 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (comparing the procedural differences between a motion filed pursuant to rule 3.850 and one filed pursuant to rule 3.800(a), and noting: “Given the absence of any time limitation for filing a [rule 3.800(a)] motion, and the unavailability of an evidentiary hearing, the burden is on the movant to demonstrate that the trial court's error and the defendant's entitlement to relief are apparent from the face of the record.”) (emphasis added) (citing Williams v. State, 957 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 2007); Porkolab v. State, 187 So. 3d 945 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016); McClain v. State, 157 So. 3d 528 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015); Casteel v. State, 141 So. 3d 624 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014); Smart v. State, 124 So. 3d 347 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013); Jarrett v. State, 89 So. 3d 293 (Fla. 5th