What is the test for sentencing a defendant for assault with intent to commit a sex crime during the commission of a burglary?

defendant consecutively on each count pursuant to subdivision (e)." ( 667, subd. (c)(6).) But "if two current felonies either were committed on the same occasion or do arise from the same set of operative facts, the three strikes law does not mandate consecutive sentencing; the trial court retains discretion to sentence either concurrently or consecutively." (People v. Danowski (1999) 74 Cal.App.4th 815, 821.) Although the court did not make express findings on this issue, the trial court could have implicitly concluded the assault with intent to commit a sex crime during the commission of a burglary in count 1, the oral copulation in count 2, and the false imprisonment in count 4 were committed on the same occasion and arose from the same operative facts, so the court retained discretion to impose consecutive sentences. Again, the trial court's silence does not mean it misunderstood the law. We find no error.⁴