In Re Rodney

Alfred Rodney was convicted of three sex of

fenses. He was sentenced to consecutive terms under Penal Code section 667.6. Rodney petitioned this court, arguing that his sentence was improper because his offenses constituted a single transaction and because he had not suffered a previous conviction for violation of section 220.

In the published portion of this opinion, we conclude that a defendant may be sentenced to consecutive terms under section 667.6, subdivision (d) even though the defendant had not suffered a previous violent sex crime conviction, as long as the other requirements of the subdivision are satisfied. In the unpublished portion of the opinion, we conclude the evidence supported the trial court’s conclusion that the oral copulation and rape were committed on “separate occasions,” but did not support the conclusion that the digital penetration was committed on a “separate occasion.”

Factual and Procedural Summary

Discussion

I*

II

Rodney also argues an issue of statutory construction: is section 667.6, subdivision (d) triggered only if a defendant previously suffered a conviction for violation of section 220? Section 667.6, subdivision (d) provides:…