Appellant was convicted of foreign object rape and attempted forcible rape, and sentenced to six years in state prison, consisting for three years for the penetration count and three years for the attempted rape. His case was remanded for resentencing because the trial court did not state reasons for imposing a full consecutive sentences under Penal Code section 667.6, subdivision (c). On remand, the court imposed the same sentence, stating that the reason was that the crime involved great violence and callousness and the victim was particularly vulnerable, and because the crimes were separate acts of violence. In this second appeal, appellant contended that under Apprendi and Blakely he was entitled to a jury determination of the factors cited by the court to impose the harsher provisions of section 667.6, subdivision (c). The court rejected the argument. A full strength consecutive sentence for a violent sex offense under section 667.6, subdivision (c) is not punishment beyond the statutory maximum for purposes of Apprendi and Blakely, and therefore the factors relied on by the court to support this sentencing choice did not need to be submitted to the jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.