¶1AFFIRMED. 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).
106 So. 3d 949
Sherrod v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided January 2, 2013
District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2013-01-02
Relies on Spera v. State · 950 So. 2d 641 - Scheffler v. Adams and Reese, LLP · Overton v. State
Decided 2013-01-02