SIMMONS v. STATE, 666 So.2d 131 (Fla. 1995)

JONATHAN SIMMONS, PETITIONER, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT. STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER, v. JONATHAN SIMMONS, RESPONDENT.

Nos. 85444, 85458.Supreme Court of Florida.
October 5, 1995. Rehearing Denied January 12, 1996.

Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal — Certified Great Public Importance, Third District — Case No. 94-2585 (Dade County).

Jonathan Simmons, pro se, Belle Glade.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General and Mark Rosenblatt, Assistant Attorney General, Miami, for Respondent/Petitioner.

OVERTON, Justice.

We have for review Simmons v. State, 650 So.2d 126 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995), in which the district court vacated Jonathan Simmons’ sentence and certified the following question as being one of great public importance:

Whether Hale v. State, 630 So.2d 521 (Fla. 1993), cert. denied, [___ U.S. ___, 115 S.Ct. 278, 130 L.Ed.2d 195 (1994)], precludes under all circumstances the imposition of consecutive sentences for crimes arising from a single criminal episode for habitual felony or habitual violent felony offenders.

We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. In State v. Hill, 660 So.2d 1384 (Fla. 1995), we have answered this same certified question in the affirmative. For the reasons set forth in Hill, we approve the district court’s decision in the instant case.

It is so ordered.

GRIMES, C.J., and SHAW, KOGAN, HARDING and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.

WELLS, J., dissents.