With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". CURIAM. Because the notice of appeal was not timely filed, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See Griffis v. State, 593 So.2d 308 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)(<HOLDING>). WOLF, C.J., ERVIN and LEWIS, JJ.,

A: 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
B: recognizing that an authorized and timely motion for rehearing serves to toll rendition of a final order
C: holding that an unauthorized motion for rehearing does not toll defendants time for filing a notice of appeal
D: holding order denying motion for reduction of sentence under rule 3800 is not appealable
A.