Kirby v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Per curiam
We affirm in all respects the postconviction court’s denial of Trolis Kirby’s untimely motion filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We write only to note that we agree with the opinions of our sister courts in Mendoza v. State, 93 So.3d 458, 458 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012), and Harricharan v. State, 59 So.3d 1162, 1163 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011), which explicitly reject the claim that the ruling in State v. Montgomery, 39 So.3d 252 (Fla.2010), can be applied retroactively to cases that were final before Montgomery was decided.
Affirmed.
MORRIS, BLACK, and SLEET, JJ„ Concur.
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. MontgomerySupreme Court of Florida · 2010
- Harricharan v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2011
- Mendoza v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2012