Larry Williams, Appellant, v. The State of Florida, Appellee. (2023)

Affirmed. See Williams v. State, 284 So. 3d 502 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019); State v. McBride, 848 So. 2d 287, 290–91 (Fla. 2003) (holding that, although res judicata does not prevent a defendant from filing successive 3.800 motions raising new issues, collateral estoppel prevents a defendant from relitigating issues previously presented and decided). See also Ramirez v. State, 47 Fla. L. Weekly D1823 at *1 (Fla. 3d DCA August 31, 2022) (“A motion to correct illegal sentence under rule 3.800(a) is not cognizable where, as here, the defendant seeks to challenge the validity of the conviction and, only by extension, the ‘legality’ of the resulting sentence”) (citing Planas v. State, 271 So. 3d 76 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019); Lopez v. State, 2 So. 3d 1057, 1059 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009); Morgan v. State, 888 So. 2d 128, 129 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (acknowledging “a motion to correct illegal sentence is an appropriate procedure for challenging a sentence, but not a conviction”)).

PER CURIAM.