incarceration followed by four years of probation. McCord filed a rule 3.850 motion to vacate or set aside the judgment, raising four issues. First, McCord alleges ineffective assistance of counsel based on his attorney’s failure to move for appointment of a psychologist to evaluate him in the trial proceedings. McCord claims to have the emotional and educational level of a preteen child. The trial court, in its order denying McCord’s rule 3.850 motion, attached a copy of his trial attorney’s motion for psychiatric examination and the court’s order appointing two experts to examine McCord. Each expert filed a report finding that McCord was competent to proceed to trial. Thus, we conclude that McCord’s first claim is refuted by the record. See Watts v. State, 593 So.2d 198 (Fla.1992) (<HOLDING>). In his second and fourth issues, McCord
holding that a defendant who did not raise the issue of incompetency at the first opportunity and who waited over one month after receiving notice of the mental evaluation to request supporting documents was not entitled to a second mental evaluation holding that a defendant claiming immunity pursuant to section 7760321 florida statutes must file a motion to dismiss pursuant to florida rule of criminal procedure 3190b and requiring trial court to address the motion at a pretrial evidentiary hearing holding that failure to appoint a second expert to examine the defendants mental competency to stand trial is not fundamental error holding that the failure to appoint the department of health and rehabilitative services diagnosis and evaluation team to perform the mental evaluation pursuant to section 91611ld florida statutes 1997 was harmless if the defendant re ceived a constitutionally adequate hearing regarding his competency holding claim of deprivation of right to competent mental health evaluation was procedurally barred because it could have been raised on direct appeal