California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Harpe, H039590 (Cal. App. 2014):
In the present case, defendant did not merely possess ammunition inside of the firearm; he possessed ammunition outside of the firearm. Moreover, the amount of ammunition defendant possessed exceeded the capacity of the firearm. Furthermore, a gun and ammunition do not necessarily serve the same purpose, since ammunition can be used to resupply a gun that has been exhausted or given to some other person who might need it. Section 654 does not preclude multiple punishment for a defendant's " 'simultaneous possession of different items of contraband' " when " 'the possession of one item is not essential to the possession of another separate item.' " (People v. Jones (2012) 54 Cal.4th 350, 358.)
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.