RETCNICK FAUSTEN
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A scoresheet error raised under rule 3.800(a) is harmless if the trial court could have imposed the same sentence using a corrected scoresheet, and relief under rule 3.800(c) is non-appealable.
[1] A scoresheet error alleged in a rule 3.800(a) motion is harmless error if the trial court could have imposed the same sentence using a corrected sentencing scoresheet.
[2] An appeal from an order denying relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(c) seeking reduction or modification of a legal sentence is not appealable.
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“a scoresheet error raised under rule 3.800(a) is harmless if the court could have imposed the same sentence using a corrected scoresheet”
The court applied the harmless error standard from Brooks v. State when considering whether the alleged scoresheet error warranted relief.
Retcnick Fausten appealed an order denying his rule 3.800 motion that sought correction of an allegedly illegal sentence under rule 3.800(a) and reduc…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Harmless Error Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
Appeal of order denying rule 3.800 motion from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Joseph George Marx, Judge; L.T. Case Nos. 502018CF009089A, 502018CF011782A, 502017CF006374A, 502018CF009391A, 502018CF008313A, and 502017CF005872A .
Retcnick Fausten, West Palm Beach, pro se. No appearance required for appellee. PER CURIAM.
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.
2
MAY, GERBER and FORST, JJ., concur.
* * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Brooks v. State, 969 So. 2d 238 (Fla. 2007)
- HHH Equities, Inc. v. Hall, 798 So. 2d 887 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)