How has the sentencing judge applied a consecutive term for an assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm?

At the outset, our review of the factors stated by the sentencing judge to be used in support of the sentencing on the principal term and the reasons expressed in support of the consecutive sentence do not disclose any sentencing error. We further note that appellant cites no authority to this court in support of his contention that the factors expressed by the court as a basis for the consecutive sentence were improper. Appellant contends that the sentencing choice in the instant case was based on the use of the same facts, [160 Cal.App.3d 738] the knife use to aggravate and to impose a consecutive sentence. Section 1170, subdivision (b), of the Penal Code prohibits imposition of an upper term and a consecutive term based on the same enhancement. (People v. Lawson (1980) 107 Cal.App.3d 748, 165 Cal.Rptr. 764.) We note, however, that in the instant case the mid term was imposed and not the upper term.