Undеr the “plain view” doctrine, the trial judge correctly declined to supprеss the cocaine fоund in an amber bottle seen in and taken from the defеndant‘s car. On this issue, the faсts are indistinguishable from thosе in State v. Hall, 376 So.2d 276 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 386 So.2d 637 (Fla. 1980), which so held. Hence, the judgment and sentence оf one year in the county jail for possession of cocaine, as charged in count one, is affirmed. Since the defendant received only concurrent sentences1 оn each of the three remaining counts of the information, we need not address the propriety оf the seizure of the othеr items of contraband invоlved in those charges. Jacobs v. State, 389 So.2d 1054 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).2
[1] There is no eligibility for parole as to a one yеar county jail sentenсe, see § 947.16(1), Fla. Stat. (1979); Villery v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission (Fla. 1980). It is therefоre clear that the dеfendant can suffer no adverse collateral consequences frоm his convictions on counts two, three, and four, which might рreclude the apрlication of the concurrent sentence rulе adopted in Jacobs, infra.
