concerning his conviction and one issue concerning his sentence. We affirm the denial of relief as to Walker’s conviction without discussion. However, we remand for further proceedings on Walker’s sentence. Walker contends that even though his offense occurred on October 14, 1994, the trial court used the 1995 sentencing guidelines when it sentenced him in September 1996. Walker argues that he is entitled to be resentenced because the supreme court recently declared the 1995 sentencing guidelines unconstitutional. See Heggs v. State, 759 So.2d 620, 627 (Fla.2000). The trial court denied Walker relief, noting that Walker’s offense did not occur within the applicable window period for challenging the constitutionality of the guidelines. See Trapp v. State, 760 So.2d 924, 928 (Fla.2000) (<HOLDING>). While we agree with the trial court that
holding that only those persons whose offenses were committed on or after october 1 1995 and before may 24 1997 have standing to challenge their sentences under heggs holding that persons challenging a sentence imposed under the 1995 sentencing guidelines have standing to do so if the relevant criminal offense occurred on or after october 1 1995 and before may 25 1997 holding that those persons with standing to challenge their sentences under heggs were those whose offenses were committed on or after october 1 1995 and before may 24 1997 holding that only those defendants whose offenses occurred between october 1 1995 and may 27 1997 have standing to challenge the constitutionality of the sentencing guidelines addressed by heggs holding that the window period for standing to challenge chapter 95184 on single subject rule grounds in most cases opened on october 1 1995 and closed on may 24 1997