FAUSTEN v. STATE (2019)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Retcnick FAUSTEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D19-2185

Decided: November 06, 2019

Retcnick Fausten, West Palm Beach, pro se. No appearance required for appellee.

The defendant appeals an order denying his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800 motion for correction, reduction, and modification of his sentence. It appears the defendant was seeking to correct an allegedly illegal sentence under rule 3.800(a), and a reduction or modification of a legal sentence under rule 3.800(c).

To the extent the defendant was seeking relief under rule 3.800(a), we affirm. See Brooks v. State, 969 So. 2d 238, 242-43 (Fla. 2007) (holding that a scoresheet error raised under rule 3.800(a) is harmless if the court could have imposed the same sentence using a corrected scoresheet). To the extent the defendant was seeking relief under rule 3.800(c), we dismiss the appeal as a non-appealable order. See Mickens v. State, 985 So. 2d 681 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008); Regis v. State, 798 So. 2d 887 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001).

Affirmed in part; dismissed in part.

Per Curiam.

May, Gerber and Forst, JJ., concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network