People v. Larson CA4/2

DISCUSSION

Defendant contends that the trial court abused its discretion in imposing

consecutive 25-years-to-life sentences for his two assault with a deadly weapon

convictions.

“It is well established that a trial court has discretion to determine whether several

sentences are to run concurrently or consecutively.” (People v. Bradford (1976)

Cal.3d 8, 20; see also People v. Rodriguez (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th 1257, 1262.) This

discretion stems from section 669, subdivision (a), which states: “When a person is

convicted of two or more crimes, . . . the second or other subsequent judgment upon

which sentence is ordered to be executed shall direct whether the terms of imprisonment

or any of them to which he or she is sentenced shall run concurrently or consecutively.”

(Rodriguez, at p. 1262 [absent an express statutory provision to the contrary, § 669

provides that a trial court shall impose either concurrent or consecutive terms for multiple

convictions].)

Where a defendant has been convicted of a number of serious felonies, each of

which independently would subject the defendant to a life term under the habitual

offender statute, the trial court has discretion to…