In a sexual assault case, in what circumstances were sufficient evidence to convict appellant of perverting the course of justice?

Flores to twice leave the motel to avoid the police, were sufficient to support the convictions. (See Hutchinson, supra, 71 Cal.2d at pp. 345-346; People v. Taylor, supra, 151 Cal.App.3d at p. 436.)

Finally, the jury was entitled to reject as implausible appellant's claim that he was simply trying to fasten his pants after an extended session of oral sex that went unobserved by the taxi driver. (See People v. Showers (1968) 68 Cal.2d 639, 643 ["False statements regarding incriminating circumstances constitute evidence which may support an inference of consciousness of guilt"].) During sentencing, the trial court described appellant's testimony as unpersuasive, stating: "I didn't believe anything that [he] said during the trial really, and it's pretty clear that the jury didn't either."