[Published Decision] Court of Appeal struck the parole revocation fine (because appellant received a sentence with no possibility of parole) and remanded the matter for the trial court to exercise its discretion on whether to impose concurrent or consecutive life terms using appropriate considerations. Here, the Court of Appeal found that trial court was clear about why it chose consecutive rather than concurrent LWOP terms, and that its sole reason – the possibility of appellate relief on one or more counts – was not an appropriate basis for imposing consecutive terms.
^