Appellant was charged with a strike at a time when the strikes statute required personal use of a firearm . There was insufficient proof of personal use of a firearm when the prosecutor merely proved appellant was convicted of assault with a firearm in 1994. However, the proper remedy was remand to the trial court to permit the prosecution to present new evidence on the issue. Retrial was not barred by double jeopardy, res judicata, collateral estoppel, law of the case, or considerations of fundamental fairness.