P. v. Simpson
This is the second appeal for defendant Timothy Tyrone Simpson who was initially convicted by a jury of sexual offenses against three minor victims and sentenced to 90 years to life, consecutive to 15 years, in prison. In the first appeal we concluded the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions for forcible sexual penetration and forcible rape as to one of the victims (victim 1) and reduced those convictions to the lesser included offenses of assault with intent to commit sexual penetration and assault with intent to commit rape (former Pen. Code, [1] § 220, subd. (a)).[2] We remanded for resentencing. (People v. Simpson (Sept. 26, 2011) H036255 [nonpub. opn.].)
On remand, the trial court imposed a total term of 33 years, which included consecutive eight year terms (twice the middle term of four years) on the two assault charges. Simpson appeals from this new sentence.
Simpson argues that the trial court erred in imposing consecutive sentences on the two assault convictions because: (1) it failed to state sufficient reasons to impose consecutive sentences as required by section 667.6, subdivision (c);[3] (2) the offenses were not separate acts supported by separate intents; and (3) trial court improperly concluded the two offenses were violent even though this court had found, in Simpson’s first appeal, there was insufficient evidence to establish that they involved force, fear or duress. Simpson further argues, to the extent his claims are deemed forfeited due to defense counsel’s failure to object below, his counsel provided constitutionally ineffective assistance.
We reject his arguments in their entirety and shall affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Simpson