Opinion
No. 2D14–2387.
10-22-2014
Russell A. Rogers, pro se.
Russell A. Rogers, pro se.
Opinion
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Rogers v. State, 50 So.3d 609 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (table decision); Doby v. State, 25 So.3d 598 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) ; Hughes v. State, 22 So.3d 132 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) ; Rogers v. State, 940 So.2d 433 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (table decision); Bizzell v. State, 912 So.2d 386 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) ; Rogers v. State, 896 So.2d 759 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (table decision); Rogers v. State, No. 2D03–4685, (Fla. 2d DCA Sept. 22, 2004); Brown v. State, 827 So.2d 1054 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) ; Jenkins v. State, 794 So.2d 654 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) ; Harris v. State, 777 So.2d 994 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) ; Kilpatrick v. State, 658 So.2d 1158 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) ; Hix v. State, 881 So.2d 586 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004) ; Harris v. State, 789 So.2d 1114 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).
ALTENBERND, VILLANTI, and BLACK, JJ., Concur.