California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Nguyen, G054768 (Cal. App. 2018):
that act or omission violates more than one statute and thus constitutes more than one crime. Although the distinct crimes may be charged in separate counts and may result in multiple verdicts of guilt, the trial court may impose sentence for only one offensethe one carrying the highest punishment." (People v. Liu (1996) 46 Cal.App.4th 1119, 1135.)
"'It has long been established that the imposition of concurrent sentences is precluded by section 654 [citations] because the defendant is deemed to be subjected to the term of both sentences although they are served simultaneously.' [Citation.] Instead, the accepted 'procedure is to sentence defendant for each count and stay execution of sentence on certain of the convictions to which section 654 is applicable.' [Citations.] Accordingly, although there appears to be little practical difference between imposing concurrent sentences, as the trial court did, and staying sentence on two of the convictions, as defendant urges, the law is settled that the sentences must be stayed to the extent that section 654 prohibits multiple punishment." (People v. Jones (2012) 54 Cal.4th 350, 353.)
"'Whether a course of criminal conduct is divisible and therefore gives rise to more than one act within the meaning of section 654 depends on the intent and objective of the actor. If all of the offenses were incident to one objective, the defendant may be punished for any one of such offenses but not for more than one.'" (People v. Correa (2012) 54 Cal.4th 331, 336.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.