Can a defendant argue that the trial court erred by failing to expressly state its reasons for imposing consecutive sentences?

Because the parties had a meaningful opportunity to object to consecutive terms, the defendant's argument that the trial court erred by its failure to expressly state its reasons for imposing consecutive sentences forfeits the claim on appeal. (See People v. Gonzalez (2003) 31 Cal.4th 745, 751.)

Anticipating that conclusion, defendant argues his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance in failing to object. But even assuming arguendo the failure to object constituted ineffective assistance, defendant cannot establish prejudice. (See People v. Maury (2003) 30 Cal.4th 342, 389 [to establish prejudice for purposes of a claim of ineffective assistance, "the record must demonstrate 'a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different' "].)