P. v. Blackman CA2/1
Defendant and appellant Chance Blackman contends that the trial court erred by concluding that it was required to impose consecutive sentences for his convictions for forcible oral copulation, in violation of Penal Code section 288a, subdivision (c)(2)(A), and forcible rape, in violation of section 261, subdivision (a)(2). The two convictions arose from Blackman’s conduct with one victim in a relatively short period of time, and Blackman argues that the offenses did not occur on “separate occasions” as defined under the mandatory consecutive sentencing provision of section 667.6, subdivision (d). We affirm.
Comments on P. v. Blackman CA2/1