¶1In Taft v. State, 468 So.2d 472 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), the court vacated Taft’s sentence because he was sentenced pursuant to the guidelines in effect at the time of sentencing as opposed to the guidelines in effect at the time the crime was committed. In State v. Jackson, 478 So.2d 1054 (Fla.1985), we held that the trial court may sentence a defendant pursuant to the guidelines in effect at the time of sentenc: ing.
¶2Accordingly, the decision of the district court is quashed.
¶3It is so ordered.
¶4concurring specially.
¶5I concur because this case is controlled by the decision of this Court in State v. Jackson, 478 So.2d 1054 (Fla.1985). I agree, however, with Justice Ehrlich’s dissent in that case which concludes that ex post facto protection should apply to the sentencing guidelines.