COTO v. STATE (2019)

Affirmed. See State v. Smith, 241 So. 3d 53, 54 (Fla. 2018) (holding, in answer to a certified question of great public importance, that a defendant who claims that the offense as charged in the information is barred by the statute of limitations must raise the issue in the trial court in order to preserve the issue for direct appeal). See also State v. Callaway, 658 So. 2d 983, 988 (Fla. 1995), receded from on other grounds in Dixon v. State, 730 So. 2d 265 (Fla. 1999) (holding: “A rule 3.800 motion can be filed at any time, even decades after a sentence has been imposed, and as such, its subject matter is limited to those sentencing issues that can be resolved as a matter of law without an evidentiary determination”); Potter v. State, 769 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (same).

PER CURIAM.