Shiva v. State (782 So. 2d 501, 2001)

PER CURIAM.

The order summarily denying Appellant’s motion for postconviction relief is affirmed, without prejudice to his filing an amended timely sworn motion for postcon-viction relief challenging the voluntary and intelligent character of his plea. See Mortimer v. State, 770 So.2d 743 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); Murphy v. State, 773 So.2d 1174 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). As the Second District did in Murphy, we certify conflict with Booker v. State, 771 So.2d 1187 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000).

GUNTHER, STONE and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.