
    Joseph INNES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 91-02666.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    May 6, 1992.
    James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, Bartow, and Allyn Giambalvo, Asst. Public Defender, Clearwater, for appellant.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Stephen A. Baker, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Davis v. State, 528 So.2d 521 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 536 So.2d 243 (Fla.1988). We recognize that our decision in Davis is in conflict with Lang v. State, 566 So.2d 1354 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990).

ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and BLUE, J., concur.

PARKER, J., concurs specially.

PARKER, Judge,

concurring specially.

I concur with the majority. But for this court’s opinion in Davis, I would reverse this case because the record fails to show that Innes waived the trial court’s required findings under Chapter 39, Florida Statutes. See Evans v. State, 594 So.2d 835 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992).  