Is a sexual assault conviction for the sexual penetration of a minor sufficient to warrant a full, separate, and consecutive sentence?

Defendant contends the trial court abused its discretion when it stated, as the sole reason for imposition of a full, separate, and consecutive sentence for the sexual penetration conviction, that "[c]onsecutive sentencing is indicated because of the manner in which the crimes were carried out, which indicates planning." Defendant asserts that, to constitute planning, the conduct must be such that, when compared to other ways in which a crime could be committed, would make the crime committed by defendant distinctively worse than the ordinary. (Citing People v. Charron (1987) 193

Page 16