Martinez v. State

Because appellant’s sentence is illegal, and he is not serving any concurrent legal sentence of the same length, I conclude that despite the fact that this is a successive claim, he is entitled to relief from an illegal sentence. We ourselves have, in an en banc opinion, addressed and corrected an illegal sentence, despite the fact it was a second successive motion. See Wilson v. State, 669 So.2d 1071, 1072 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).

In State v. McBride, 848 So.2d 287 (Fla. 2003), our supreme court explained that Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), which allows for the correction of an…