In ground three of his January 21, 2014 motion, appellant alleged that defense counsel was ineffective for failing to move for dismissal of the charges for felon in possession of a firearm and felon in possession of ammunition after his conviction for armed burglary, on double jeopardy grounds: He contended he could not be convicted of possessing the same firearm or ammunition that served as the basis for his armed burglary conviction. In his initial brief, however, appellant contends that his dual convictions for felon in possession of a firearm and felon in possession of ammunition violate double jeopardy proscriptions, and that one of these convictions should be vacated, without regard to the armed burglary conviction. See Bell v. State, 122 So.3d 958, 961 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (<HOLDING>); see also Strain v. State, 77 So.3d 796, 797
holding that possession of a firearm by a felon is a serious offense for  3162a2 purposes 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 holding that dual convictions of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and possession of ammunition by a convicted felon violated double jeopardy holding that double jeopardy precludes dual convictions for felon in possession of a firearm and felon in possession of separate ammunition because section 790231 florida statutes prohibits possession of  any firearm ammunition or electric weapon or device emphasis in original holding alford plea admissible in prosecution for felon in possession of firearm