Albert Quinn appeals the trial courts order denying his motion to clarify sentence without an evidentiary hearing. The trial court found the motion to be successive. We agree. See Quinn v. State, 336 So. 3d 262 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022); State v. McBride, 848 So. 2d 287, 289-90 (Fla. 2003) (explaining that the law of the case “doctrine requires that ‘questions of law actually decided on appeal must govern the case in the same court and the trial court, through all subsequent stages of the proceedings’ ” (quoting Fla. Dept. of Transp. v. Juliano, 801 So. 2d 101, 105 (Fla. 2001))).
Affirmed.
PER CURIAM.