final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2)
from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Milton Hirsch,
Judge Lower Tribunal No. 98-28508B .
Law Florida, P.A., and Brett S. Chase (Saint Petersburg), for
Moody, Attorney General, and Brian H. Zack, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee.
EMAS, C.J., and FERNANDEZ and LINDSEY, JJ.
Allen appeals the trial court's order denying his motion
to correct illegal sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of
Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We affirm without discussion
that portion of the order denying relief on the life
sentences imposed on Allen for five counts of armed
kidnapping, one count of armed robbery, and one count of
armed carjacking. See Acosta v. State, 103 So.3d 234
(Fla. 3d DCA 2012); Corria v. State, 932 So.2d 530
(Fla. 3d DCA 2006).
we reverse and remand that portion of the order denying
relief on Allen's claim that the three-year mandatory
minimum sentences, imposed pursuant to section 775.087(2),
Florida Statutes (1998),  are illegal. We agree with Allen that
the verdict form failed to provide the "clear jury
finding" that Allen personally possessed a firearm, a
prerequisite for imposition of the three-year mandatory
minimum sentence. See Tucker v. State, 726 So.2d 768
(Fla. 1999); State v. Hargrove, 694 So.2d 729 (Fla.
1997) (superseded on other grounds as recognized in
Galindez v. State, 955 So.2d 517, 523 (Fla. 2007));
State v. Tripp, 642 So.2d 728 (Fla. 1994); State
v. Overfelt, 457 So.2d 1385 (Fla. 1984) (superseded on
other grounds as recognized in Galindez, 955 So.2d
instant case, the Information alleged that Allen and a
co-defendant committed the above-described crimes with a
firearm. At trial, the jury was instructed that it could find
Allen guilty as a principal to the crimes charged. The
verdicts did not contain a finding that Allen
personally possessed a firearm during the commission
of these offenses. Instead, the verdict for each count merely
found Allen guilty of kidnapping "with a firearm,"
robbery "with a firearm," and carjacking "with
a firearm," all as charged in the Information. Had Allen
been the only defendant charged with the crimes for
which he was convicted, this verdict would have been
sufficient to sustain the three-year mandatory minimum
sentences. See Tucker, 726 So.2d at 769 n. 1
(upholding three-year mandatory minimum sentence where
verdict found defendant guilty of attempted murder "with
a firearm" as charged in the Information and was the
only defendant and assailant); Gillis v.
State, 486 So.2d 706, 707 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986) (reversing
three-year mandatory minimum sentence under similar
circumstances and noting the "verdict form would be
sufficient to comply with the requirement of a jury finding
of possession by Gillis pursuant to State v.
Overfelt, 457 So.2d 1385 (Fla. 1984), if there had been
but one defendant and one firearm").
where, as here, the defendant and co-defendant were jointly
charged with committing a crime with a firearm, and the
defendant could be found guilty as a principal to the crime,
three-year mandatory minimum sentence under section
775.087(2) may not lawfully be imposed unless the jury makes
a factual finding that during the commission of the crime the
defendant personally possessed a firearm. Gillis,
486 So.2d at 707; Alusma v. State, 939 So.2d 1081
(Fla. 4th DCA 2006).
therefore affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand this
cause to the trial court to vacate the three-year mandatory
minimum portions of the sentences imposed.
 At the time of these offenses, section
775.087(2) provided that if a person was convicted of certain
enumerated felonies (including robbery, kidnapping or
carjacking) and "during the commission of the offense,
such person possessed a firearm," that person
"shall be sentenced to a ...