A defendant sentenced under the habitual sexual offender law may also be sentenced under the One Strike law. The defendant here was found guilty of several sex offenses, and admitted a multiple-victim special circumstance under the One Strike law (Pen. Code, sec. 667.61), as well as a prior sexual offense under the habitual sexual offender law (Pen. Code, sec. 667.71). On appeal, he argued that because he was sentenced under the habitual sexual offender law, the sentencing judge was required to strike or dismiss the finding under the One Strike law. The appellate court declined to follow People v. Snow (2003) 105 Cal.App.4th 271, which held that the two sentencing schemes were intended to be alternatives and that one or the other must be stricken. Finding the reasoning of Snow unpersuasive, the court here ruled that the court below did not err in refusing to strike, stay, or dismiss the one strike finding, even though it was not used to calculate the defendant’s sentence, because under this procedure the unused finding was properly left available should the habitual sexual offender sentence later be altered on appeal or through other proceedings.