Whether the refusal of the Supreme Court of the State of Florida to address the certified conflict between the petitioner's Second District Court of Appeal of Florida and two of its sister District Courts of Appeal, the Third and Fifth, that the trial court's lack of jurisdiction is not an exception to overcome Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure Rule 3.850(b) two-year limitation to file a 3.850 motion, violates the petitioner's United States Constitution of America Amendments 5 and 14 Amendments, procedural and substantial rights, the right not to be tried twice for the same offense, nor be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, and no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED _ /, TS THE REFUSAL OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ELORTDA, BY DECLINING TO ADDRESS THE CERTIFIED CONTLICT BETWEEN PETITIONER'S SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA AND TWO OF ITS SISTER DISTRICT COURTS OF APPFAL THE THIRD AND FIFTH; THAT TRIAL COURTS LACK OF JURTSOICTION Ts NOT LAN EXCEPTION TO OVERCOME FLORTDA RULE OF CRTATAL PROCEDURE RULE 3.85006) TWO-YEAR LIMITATION TOFILE A2:850 MOTION, VIOLATE PETITZONER'S UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION OF AMERICA | | AMBLOMENTS 5 ALD 14 AmELOMENTS, PROCEDURAL AND SUBSTAN TIAL RIGHTS, THE RIGHT NOT TO BETTCFED TWICE FOR THESANE OFFENSE, MOK .BE DEPRIVED OF LIPE,LIBERTY OR PROPERTY WITHOUT DOE PROCESS OF | LAW, ADD RO STATE SHALL MAKE GR EDFORCE ANY LAW WHICH SHALL ABRIDGE THE PRIVILEGES ORTMMUNITIES OF CITIZENS OF THE UDLTED STATES. 00s PETETLONER TS NOT CHALLENGTING. 3.85016)’ TWO-YEAR LIMITATION. | TTSELY BUTASKTING, WHY NOT ALLOW THE LACKOF TRIAL COURT JURISEICTION AS DESCRIBED BY THE HIGHEST COURT OF FLORTDA To BE ADDED AS “AN EXCEPTION "TO OVERCOME THE TWO-YEAR LINITATION To PILE A32SO NorDN,