Can a defendant be convicted of multiple convictions for different crimes based on a single act?

In California, it has long been held that multiple convictions may not be based on necessarily included offenses. (People v. Pearson (1986) 42 Cal.3d 351, 355.) A defendant may not stand convicted of both a lesser included crime and the greater crime, based on a single act. (See People v. Montoya (2004) 33 Cal.4th 1031, 1034 [a judicially created exception to 954 which permits multiple convictions for different offenses based on the same conduct].) When multiple convictions are based on necessarily included offenses, the conviction for the greater offense is controlling, and the conviction for the lesser offense must be reversed. (People v. Pearson, supra, at p. 355.)

"There are two tests for determining whether one offense is necessarily included in another: the 'elements' test and the 'accusatory pleading' test. [Citation.]" (People v.

Page 3