With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". with regard to that ground; we deny the remaining grounds without further comment. Mr. Perri was charged with numerous offenses after he fled from law enforcement officers who tried to stop his vehicle based on a tip that he was in possession of drugs and a firearm. Two of the offenses — possession of ammunition by a convicted felon and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon — were severed from the others. Fla. 1st DCA 1998)); accord Bell v. State, 122 So.3d 958, 960-61 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (citing Boyd and holding that separate convictions for a felon’s possession of ammunition found in his pocket and a firearm found in his car’s glove compartment after he was arrested for a traffic violation violated double jeopardy); Strain v. State, 77 So.3d 796, 797 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (<HOLDING>). The State concedes that appellate counsel was

A: holding that the trial court was not entitled to impose a threeyear mandatory minimum sentence on a defendant convicted of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon where the jury verdict did not specifically find actual possession
B: holding the defendant was a convicted felon within the purview of the federal statute prohibiting the receiving and possession of firearms by a convicted felon where the defendants prior conviction was based on an idaho state probated sentence
C: holding that conviction for possession of ammunition by a convicted felon in violation of 18 usc  922g is valid under the commerce clause as long as the ammunition had previously moved in interstate commerce even though the possession did not have a substantial affect on same
D: holding that dual convictions of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and possession of ammunition by a convicted felon violated double jeopardy
D.