With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". injury do not violate double jeopardy when both convictions arise out of a single transaction. Lott contends otherwise based on State v. Cooper, 634 So.2d 1074 (Fla.1994), where the Florida Supreme Court held that “[i]t is entirely appropriate to convict a person of both DUI manslaughter and driving while license is suspended, but it is inappropriate to enhance the degree of both crimes by using a single homicide.” Id. at 1074-75 (citing State v. Chapman, 625 So.2d 838 (Fla.1993), and Houser v. State, 474 So.2d 1193 (Fla.1985)). Lott wants to extend the reasoning from Cooper and Chapman, both of which involved a single homicide, to the instant case where a single serious injury occurred. In support of this analysis, he cites Kelly v. State, 987 So.2d 1237, 1239-40 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (<HOLDING>). The logic applied in Cooper, Chapman, and

A: holding that life sentence imposed for kidnapping with bodily injury of 14yearold victim was not cruel and unusual punishment even though bodily injury was slight given circumstances attendant upon offense
B: holding that it was a double jeopardy violation to convict and sentence for both dui with serious bodily injury and driving without a valid license with serious bodily injury based on an injury to a single victim
C: holding that specific intent is not element of assault resulting in serious bodily injury
D: holding that the fatal injury to a murder victim may be considered as satisfying the bodily injury component of the capital felony of kidnapping with bodily injury
B.