Hampton v. State ( 2006 )

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed, without prejudice to appellant’s filing a timely and sufficient rule 3.850 motion alleging, if he can, that he does not actually qualify for sentencing as a habitual felony offender or as a prison releasee reoffender. Bover v. State, 797 So.2d 1246, 1251 n. 5 (Fla.2001); Adlington v. State, 840 So.2d 354 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. denied, 859 So.2d 513 (Fla.2003); Macaluso v. State, 912 So.2d 694, 695-96 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005).

KLEIN, TAYLOR and MAY, JJ., concur.