Sherrod v. State

AFFIRMED. See Spera v. State, 971 So.2d 754 (Fla.2007) (explaining that a trial court should allow amendment of a 3.850 motion for the purpose of correcting a facial deficiency); Henderson v. State, 919 *950So.2d 652 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); Overton v. State, 976 So.2d 536, 545-46 (Fla.2007).

DAVIS, VAN NORTWICK, and ROWE, JJ., concur.