ROBINSON v. STATE (2020)

Raudel E. Robinson appeals from the summary denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We affirm the order under review based on the authority of Pedroza v. State, 291 So.3d 541 (Fla. 2020). Robinson raised an additional issue in his 3.800(a) motion that the trial court failed to address in the order under review. Although this Court would usually remand to the trial court to consider the issue that was not addressed in its order, see McFarlane v. State, 957 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007), we do not do so because remanding would be futile. The additional claim is not cognizable in rule 3.800(a) motion as it attacks his conviction, not the legality of his sentence. As the claim attacks his conviction, the claim should have been raised in a rule 3.850 motion. Even if the trial court would have treated the rule 3.800(a) motion as rule 3.850 motion, the motion would have been untimely filed as it was not filed within the two-year limit set forth in rule 3.850.

Affirmed.

HENDON, J.