Does a judge who sentenced a defendant to a determinate and indeterminate sentence need to serve the determinate sentence equally?

judge noted he had a "good recollection" of the facts of the case, and he felt "bound by the rule of law" to impose the sentence. We presume the trial court knew the applicable law and followed it. (People v. Martinez (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 1511, 1517.)

We are unpersuaded the statement that count 1 "must be served fully consecutive to the sentence imposed in Count 2, as determinate and indeterminate terms do not mix" indicated a lack of sentencing discretion. To the contrary, this was a correct statement of the law because a determinate sentence must be served before any indeterminate sentence, and no part of the determinate sentence may be credited toward the defendant's eligibility for parole. ( 669, subd. (a); People v. Dixon (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 1029, 1036-1037, fn. 8.)