ROY v. STATE (1997)

In this direct criminal appeal, although appellant raises a number of issues, we conclude that only one merits discussion.   Appellant challenges his convictions for both carjacking with a firearm and use of a firearm during the commission of a felony as a violation of double jeopardy because both were predicated upon the same episode.   We agree.   Accordingly, we reverse appellant's conviction for use of a firearm during the commission of a felony, and remand with directions that the trial court vacate that conviction.   See, e.g., M.P. v. State, 682 So.2d 79 (Fla.1996);  State v. Brown, 633 So.2d 1059 (Fla.1994);  Cleveland v. State, 587 So.2d 1145 (Fla.1991).   In all other respects, we affirm.

AFFIRMED IN PART;  REVERSED IN PART;  and REMANDED, with directions.

PER CURIAM.

WEBSTER, MICKLE and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.