McClinton v. State

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT PHILIP McCLINTON, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 2D04-2779 Opinion filed December 10, 2004. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Roger Allan Alcott, Judge. PER CURIAM. Philip McClinton challenges the trial court s order denying his motion for postconviction DNA testing pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.853. We affirm the trial court s denial of the motion on the ground that it is facially insufficient. Our affirmance is without prejudice to any right McClinton might have to file a facially sufficient rule 3.853 motion within sixty days from the date of the issuance of the mandate in this case. See Saffold v. State, 850 So. 2d 574 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). SILBERMAN, CANADY, and VILLANTI, JJ., Concur. -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.