Can a defendant be punished for both kidnapping for robbery and attempting to dissuade a witness by threat of violence?

In People v. Nichols (1994) 29 Cal.App.4th 1651, the defendant "kidnapped a truck driver and hijacked his tractor-trailer . . . . During the two-hour kidnapping [the defendant] looked at the victim's driver's license and said 'If you open your mouth we are going to kill you. I know where you live.'" (Id. at p. 1654.) The appellate court held that the defendant could be separately punished for both kidnapping for robbery and attempting to dissuade a witness by threat of violence (see ibid.): "We find substantial evidence that appellant had two separate objectives: (1) to hijack the truck by kidnapping and robbing the victim and (2) to avoid detection and conviction by dissuading and intimidating the victim. [] The first objective was accomplished in two hours. The second was ongoing. It was initially successful when the victim, fearing for his life, falsely told the police he had been blindfolded and could not identify any of the kidnappers. [] The means of achieving each objective was also different. A shotgun pressed against the victim's stomach achieved the first. Looking at the victim's driver's license, reading aloud his address, and threatening future harm achieved the second." (Id. at pp. 1657-1658.)