of a ten-year period of probation. See id. The third district dismissed the appeal and stated Since the authority conferred upon the court by Section 948.05 is entirely a matter of grace, we hold that an order denying that relief is non-appeal-able .... This conclusion is required by the principle that the advisability, as opposed to the legality, of a particular sentence is not subject to appellate review, ... and, even more plainly, by those cases which hold that no appeal may be taken from the denial of a motion for a reduction of sentence filed under Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800. Id. (citations omitted). See Oser v. State, 699 So.2d 844, 845 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (noting “orders denying motions to mitigate ... [are] not appealable”); Clewis v. State, 715 So.2d 1129, 1129 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998) (<HOLDING>). We therefore affirm the order requiring
holding an order denying a motion for summary judgment is interlocutory and not appealable holding that there is no authority for a motion for rehearing of an order disposing of a rule 3800 motion to correct illegal sentence and therefore the motion for rehearing did not postpone rendition of the order so as to make the notice of appeal timely holding that an order denying a motion to vacate a  1782 order and denying a motion to quash the subpoena was immediately appealable holding order denying motion for reduction of sentence under rule 3800 is not appealable holding that an order denying a motion to correct reduce or modify a sentence under rule 3800 is not appealable