Is a judge bound to impose a concurrent sentence on a defendant who has accepted a plea bargain?

By a parity of reasoning, a judge who has accepted a plea bargain is bound to impose a sentence within the limits of that bargain. Should he consider the plea bargain unacceptable, his remedy is to reject it, not to violate it, directly or indirectly. (Pen.Code, 1192.5.) Thus, in People v. Simpson (1979) 90 Cal.App.3d 919, 924, 154 Cal.Rptr. 249, as here, the plea bargain provided for concurrent terms. The judge found as an aggravating factor that defendant had been convicted of other crimes for which consecutive terms could have been imposed (Cal.Rules of Court, rule 421(a)(7)). The appellate court held this factor was inapplicable, since "because of the bargain, this was not a case in which consecutive sentences 'could have been imposed.' " (Ibid.)