Mitchell v. State (74 So. 3d 160, 2011)

PER CURIAM.

In this direct appeal from his judgment and sentences, Joshua Mitchell challenges the imposition of sex offender probation and his designation as a sexual predator. We affirm the judgment and sentences. However, our affirmance is without prejudice to Mr. Mitchell’s right to file a timely, facially sufficient motion in accordance with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 3.850. See Nedd v. State, 855 So.2d 664 (Fla. 2d DCA2008).

Affirmed.

WALLACE, KHOUZAM, and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.