Brayton v. State

¶1Affirmed. All of appellant’s allegations are either facially insufficient or conclusively refuted by the portions of the record that the trial court attached to its order of denial. With respect to appellant’s allegation challenging the constitutionality of the habitual offender statute as violative of the single subject rule, see McCall v. State, 583 So.2d 411 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991), rev. granted, 593 So.2d 1052 (Fla.1992).