¶1Ronald J. Thompson, Raiford, pro se.
¶2No Appearance for Appellee.
¶3PER CURIAM.
¶4We affirm the trial court's denial of rule 3.850 relief for three different reasons. First, the motion is untimely because it was filed more than two years after the judgment and sentence became final. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(b). In addition, the motion is successive to a prior unsuccessful rule 3.850 motion filed by the appellant. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(f); Zeigler v. State,632 So.2d 48 (Fla.1993), cert. denied,513 U.S. 830, 115 S.Ct. 104, 130 L.Ed.2d 52 (1994). Finally, the motion was properly denied on the merits. See, e.g., Parker v. State,611 So.2d 1224, 1226 (Fla.1992), cert. denied,526 U.S. 1101, 119 S.Ct. 1580, 143 L.Ed.2d 675 (1999); see also Rodriguez v. State,609 So.2d 493, 499 (Fla.1992), cert. denied,510 U.S. 830, 114 S.Ct. 99, 126 L.Ed.2d 66 (1993).
¶5AFFIRMED.
¶6PALMER, C.J., THOMPSON and MONACO, JJ., concur.