DAVIS v. STATE (2020)

Affirmed. See Shepard v. State, 259 So. 3d 701, 706 (Fla. 2018) (holding “that an automobile is a weapon under section 775.087(1) if it is used to inflict harm on another. Further, it is a question of fact for the jury to determine whether an automobile or other object was used as a weapon by the defendant”); Miller v. State, 918 So. 2d 415, 417 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (cited with approval by Shepard for the proposition that “whether a motor vehicle is used or threatened to be used in a way that makes it a deadly weapon is typically a question resolved by a jury”). See also Cox v. State, 221 So. 3d 723, 725 n. 5 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (holding that a motion to correct illegal sentence under rule 3.800(a) “must be determined as a matter of law, without an evidentiary hearing, based upon an error apparent on the face of the court record. Given the absence of any time limitation for filing such 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”).

PER CURIAM.