I join the majority opinion. I write separately only to note that the State, while explicitly acknowledging that this Court did not grant review to determine "whether there is sufficient evidence to support the habitual offender enhancement," then argues and provides record citations to support its position that the evidence is, in fact, legally sufficient to support appellant's enhanced sentence. These arguments and record citations should be given to the court of appeals upon remand for its consideration. They are irrelevant to this Court's disposition of the only ground for review that is directly before us.

Cochran, J.

Filed: March 9, 2005.

Do Not Publish