PER CURIAM.
We review State v. Evans, 537 So.2d 639 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988), in which the Second District Court of Appeal certified the same questions as certified in Hunter v. State, 531 So.2d 239 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988), as being of great public importance:
Does an agreement whereby a convicted drug trafficker will receive a substantially reduced sentence in exchange for setting up new drug deals and testifying for the state violate the holding in
State v. Glosson[,
462 So.2d 1082 (Fla. 1985)]? Assuming the existence of a due process violation under
Glosson, does
Glosson's holding extend to a codefendant who was not the direct target of the government's agent?
Hunter, 531 So.2d at 290 n. 3. We recently addressed these issues in
State v. Hunter, 586 So.2d 319 (Fla. 1991), and accordingly, we vacate the judgment below and remand this case to the district court for reconsideration in light of
Hunter.
We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution.
It is so ordered.
SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, McDONALD, BARKETT, GRIMES, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur.