Kenneth Whitfield appeals his conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. He also appeals his habitual offender sentence arising out of a plea on two other counts of the same information.1 We affirm the habitual offender sentence on those convictions. We reverse the conviction for felon in possession and remand for a new trial on that charge only.

During the jury trial, the State sought to introduce a certified copy of one of Wfifitfield’s prior felony convictions in order to establish his legal status as a convicted felon. Prior to trial, Whitfield’s attorney had offered to stipulate to that status and, during trial, objected when the certified copy reflecting the prior conviction was admitted into evidence. While Whitfield’s case was pending on appeal, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that when a criminal defendant offers to stipulate to the convicted felon element of a charge of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, the trial court must accept that stipulation. See Brown v. State, 719 So.2d 882 (Fla. 1998). We conclude that a trial court’s failure to accept such a stipulation is subject to a harmless error analysis; however, this court cannot determine that the trial court’s refusal to accept the stipulation in this case was harmless.2 See Pierce v. State, 734 So.2d 399 (Fla. 1999). Thus, WTiitfield is entitled to a new trial on *573the charge of felon in possession of a firearm.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded for new trial in accordance with tMs opinion.