Does Section 654 of the Criminal Code apply to the possession of a firearm by a felon conviction?

Prior to sentencing, defendant did not argue that section 654 applied to his possession of a firearm by a felon conviction. Nor did he object to the consecutive sentence imposed for this conviction. Defendant's claim is nonetheless reviewable on appeal. (People v. Hester (2000) 22 Cal.4th 290, 295 ["Ordinarily, a section 654 claim is not waived by failing to object below"].)

Section 654, subdivision (a), prohibits punishing any "act or omission that is punishable in different ways by different" penal provisions. "Whether a defendant may be subjected to multiple punishments under section 654 requires a two-step inquiry, because the statutory reference to an 'act or omission' may include not only a discrete physical act but also a course of conduct encompassing several acts pursued with a single objective. [Citations.] We first consider if the different crimes were completed by a 'single physical act.' [Citation.] If so, the defendant may not be punished more than once for that act. Only if we conclude that the case involves more than a single act- i.e., a course of conduct-do we then consider whether that course of conduct reflects a single' "intent and objective"' or multiple intents and objectives. [Citations.]" (People v. Corpening (2016) 2 Cal.5th 307, 311.) "Whether a defendant will be found to have committed a single physical act for purposes of section 654 depends on whether some action the defendant is charged with having taken separately completes the actus reus for

each of the relevant criminal offenses." (Corpening, at p. 313.) The actus reus is" '[t]he wrongful deed that comprises the physical components of a crime.'" (Id. at p. 315.)