RETCNICK FAUSTEN vs STATE OF FLORIDA
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT RETCNICK FAUSTEN, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. 4D19-2185 [November 6, 2019] 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. MAY, GERBER and FORST, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
