Peel v. State

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See this court’s opinion at 210 So.2d 14. In addition, this is the second motion for similar relief and as noted in the trial judge’s order there has been no new ground set forth by appellant. CrPR 1.850, 3 F.S.A. expressly provides that the sentencing court shall not be required to entertain a second or successive motion for similar relief on behalf of the same prisoner.

LILES, Acting C. J., and MANN and McNULTY, JJ., concur.