Appellant was convicted of one count of shooting at, into or within a building; one count of shooting or discharging a firearm from a vehicle; and two counts of aggravated assault by threat with firearm. As to the aggravated assaults, the jury found beyond a reasonable doubt that Appellant actually fired shots at both victims. At the time Appellant was sentenced, prevailing case law required the trial court to impose consecutively the two 20-year mandatory minimums for the aggravated assaults.

Appellant does not challenge his convictions on appeal, but instead raises the issue of whether the mandatory portions of his sentence were required to be imposed consecutively. While this appeal was pending, the Florida Supreme Court released its opinion in Williams v. State, holding that when “multiple firearm offenses are committed contemporaneously, during which time multiple victims are shot at, then consecutive sentencing is permissible but not mandatory.” 186 So.3d 989, 993 (Fla. 2016). The supreme court reasoned that whether to impose sentences arising from the same criminal episode consecutively or concurrently was well within the sentencing judge's traditional discretionary function. Id,

Accordingly, while we affirm Appellant’s convictions, we reverse and remand for resentencing consistent with the direction set out in Williams.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.