Case Name: Kenny HURST, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2004-07-21
Citations: 876 So. 2d 1284
Docket Number: No. 4D03-2104
Parties: Kenny HURST, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: GUNTHER, STEVENSON and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 876
Pages: 1284–1284

Head Matter:
Kenny HURST, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 4D03-2104.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
July 21, 2004.
Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Marcy K. Allen, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and August A. Bonavita, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Kenny Hurst appeals the denial of his 3.170(7) motion to withdraw his nolo con-tendere pleas and the partial denial of a motion styled as a 3.800(c) "Motion to Reduce or Modify Sentence." To the extent that Hurst seeks review of the denial of his motion to withdraw pleas, the appeal is dismissed as no written order was ever entered. See Pannier v. State, 849 So.2d 1105 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Marinelli v. State, 706 So.2d 1374 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). As for the partial denial of the "Motion to Reduce or Modify Sentence," we affirm. The denial of a rule 3.800(c) motion is not appealable, see Bateman v. State, 866 So.2d 211 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004), and, even if the motion is viewed as filed pursuant to 3.800(a), as argued by Hurst, it was properly denied as the alleged errors are not apparent from the face of the record, see Jackson v. State, 803 So.2d 842, 844 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). Our affirmance is without prejudice to Hurst's right to seek any available postconviction relief.
GUNTHER, STEVENSON and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.