Does section 654 of the California Criminal Code require a defendant to have a separate intent and objective for each offence?

"But even if a course of conduct is 'directed to one objective,' it may 'give rise to multiple violations and punishment' if it is 'divisible in time.' [Citations.] Where the defendant's acts are 'temporally separated' they 'afford the defendant [an] opportunity to reflect and to renew his or her intent before committing the next [offense], thereby aggravating the violation of public security or policy already undertaken.' " (People v. Deegan (2016) 247 Cal.App.4th 532, 542.) Whether section 654 applies is generally a question of fact, and a trial court's finding (even if implied) that a defendant harbored a separate intent and objective for each offense will be upheld on appeal if supported by substantial evidence. (People v. Osband (1996) 13 Cal.4th 622, 730-731.)