Cano v. State (830 So. 2d 205, 2002)

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Kirk Cano, appeals the summary denial of his second rule 3.850 motion. We affirm the trial court’s denial of the motion as successive. See Pope v. State, 702 So.2d 221 (Fla.1997). However, the affirmance is without prejudice to Appellant filing a proper rale 3.800(a) motion challenging his prison releasee reoffender sentence. See Grant v. State, 770 So.2d 655 (Fla.2000).

AFFIRMED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

HARRIS, GRIFFIN and SAWAYA, JJ., concur.