UNDER THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTIONS (4) (0), (¢ )e 14 AMENDMENTS) CAN THE CLNEMS BEING PRESENTED HEREIN DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT MANIFEST WSUSTSECCE BE DETERMINED IN THE LOWER AND APPELLATE COURT6), WHEREAS, AN SCIEGALLY IINVALED REASON FOR DEPARTURE FRom THE GUIDELINES! RECOMMENDATION BE UPHELO xN ETS PRovrsxons BASED SOLELY UPon FLORIDA'S HABITUAL OFFENDER STATUTE 175,084(4)(a)(i)(i993), A STATUTE THAT EXPLICITLY CONFLICTS WITH FLORIDA STATUTE 921-Ool (4)(a), PROMULGATED UNDER FLORA RULES OF ERIMINAL PROCEDURE SENTENCING GUIDELINES 3,701(b)(b) (4)(8) (10),(i), 12), WHEREAS THE LANGUAGE oF FLA. STAT. 921.001(4) (6) THEREIN EXPLICZTLY MD UnamOr CUous LY THAT FLOATOA'S PROVESToWAL SWCTXONS oF 175.084(4)(a)Ci) HABITUAL OFFENDER SvaTuTE IS Nor AVALZD REASON y FOR DEPARTURE FRopn THE QUEDELANES' RECOMMENDATION MERIT REVERSAL AND REMAND FoR RESENTENC-ING 2?

WHETHER OR WoT PereczonER's (B7H) ANEXDMENT' UMCYED STATES ConsTxTUTCONAL. RIGHT To A GUARANTEED PRoPoRTONALT-TY oF SENTENCE HAS GEEN VIOLATED Pursuit To 1H **(u.s CONSTITUTEON) AMENDMENTS EQuAL PROTECTION LAW AWD THE PRovrsTonG) of THE AMENDED Laws AND RULES BEING CETED HERE XN. WHEREAS WHEN REASON FOR DEPARTING FROM THE GUIDELINES' RecommENDATION £6 NOT GIVEN ON 3.988 SENTENCING ScCorESHEET PURSUANT To THE PRovxszows HELD AND IMPLEMENTED UNDER FLOREDA RULES oF CRIM. Proce Dukes 3,70 1(6)(le) (d)(3) (10),(\)) (12), MD FLORIDA STATurE 921-001 (4) (a) To WHECH STATES THEREIN Tir! HABTTUAL. OFFENDER SANCTxaNS CANNOT BE USED AS A REASON To DEPART FROM THE GUIDELINES' RECOMMENDRTxon 7

Whether petitioner's 14th Amendment right to equal protection and proportionality of sentence has been violated