Penal Code Section 667, subdivisions (c)(6) and (c)(7), require that sentences on multiple counts be consecutive if the offenses were "not committed on the same occasion" and did not "arise from the same set of operative facts." If either one of those situations applies, the trial court has discretion to impose either consecutive or concurrent sentences. ( People v. Lawrence (2000) 24 Cal.4th 219, 233.) Two or more current felony convictions are "'not committed on the same occasion'" where they are "not committed within close temporal and spatial proximity of one another." (People v. Lawrence, supra, 24 Cal.4th at p. 233.) The term "'not arising from the same set of operative facts'" refers to convictions "not sharing common acts or criminal conduct that serves to establish the elements of the current felony offenses of which defendant stands convicted." (Ibid.) The Supreme Court observed that in considering the application of these terms to the offenses at issue, additional factors may be relevant, such as "the extent to which common acts and elements of such offenses unfold together or overlap, and the extent to which the elements of one offense have been satisfied, rendering that offense completed in the eyes of the law before the commission of further criminal acts constituting additional and separately chargeable crimes." (Ibid.)