Dorado

INTRODUCTION

The Legislature enacted Penal Code1 section 667.6 in 1979 to increase the penalties for persons convicted of certain violent sex offenses. To that end, subdivision (c) of section 667.6 (“section 667.6(c)”) provides that when a defendant is convicted of multiple sex offenses against the same victim on the same occasion, the sentencing court may, in its discretion, impose a full, separate, and consecutive sentence for each offense. But when a defendant is convicted of multiple violent sex offenses against different victims or against the same victim on separate occasions, subdivision (d) of section 667.6 (“section 667.6(d)”) mandates the sentencing court to impose a full, separate, and consecutive sentence for each offense. It is settled that sentencing courts are forbidden from relying on a single fact to aggravate a sentence twice by imposing both an upper term under section 1170, subdivision (b)(1)–(7), and a discretionary consecutive sentence under section 667.6(c). In this appeal, we confront an issue of first impression: whether the same dual use prohibition applies when the consecutive sentence is mandatory under section 667.6(d). We hold that it does. In a…