Opinion
Nos. 77347, 77883, 77884, 77581 and 77,587.
November 7, 1991.
Applications for Review of the Decisions of the District Court of Appeal — Certified Great Public Importance.
Fifth District, Case Nos. 90-934, 90-1763, 90-491, 90-856 and 90-943 (Orange, Seminole, and Osceola Counties).
James B. Gibson, Public Defender and Michael S. Becker, Asst. Public Defender, Seventh Judicial Circuit, Daytona Beach, for petitioners.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and David S. Morgan, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for respondent.
Five Consolidated Cases.
We have for review the consolidated cases of Boyd v. State, 572 So.2d 1032, 1032 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), Doughty v. State, 578 So.2d 65, 65 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), Howarth v. State, 578 So.2d 66, 66 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), Natvik v. State, 574 So.2d 1230, 1231 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), and Zozak v. State, 576 So.2d 312, 312 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990), in which the Fifth District Court of Appeal certified the following question of great public importance:
DO FLORIDA'S UNIFORM SENTENCING GUIDELINES REQUIRE THAT LEGAL CONSTRAINT POINTS BE ASSESSED FOR EACH OFFENSE COMMITTED WHILE UNDER LEGAL CONSTRAINT?
We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4).
We answered this question in the negative in Flowers v. State, 586 So.2d 1058 (Fla. 1991). Accordingly, we quash the decisions below and remand these consolidated cases for reconsideration consistent with our opinion in Flowers.
It is so ordered.
SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, McDONALD, BARKETT, GRIMES, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur.