Jackson v. State

¶1We affirm the order denying appellant’s motion for postconviction DNA testing as being legally insufficient. Appellant in fact alleges that DNA testing was done but that the results were negative and not shown to the jury. His motion appears to go more to a potential claim for postconviction relief under Rule 3.850, yet it is untimely for that relief. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(b).