Does section 654, subdivision (a) of the California Criminal Code apply to sentence a defendant for burglary and the underlying felony?

Section 654, subdivision (a), states in part: "An act or omission that is punishable in different ways by different provisions of law shall be punished under the provision that provides for the longest potential term of imprisonment, but in no case shall the act or omission be punished under more than one provision." This means that a defendant may not be punished more than once for separate acts comprising an indivisible course of conduct with a single intent; but, if the separate acts had separate intents and objectives, the defendant may be punished separately for each crime, even though they made up an indivisible course of conduct. (People v. Jones (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 1139, 1143.) We review for abuse of discretion the trial court's ruling on the applicability of section 654, and we will not reverse if substantial evidence supports the ruling. (Ibid.)

"Burglary consists of entry into a house or other specified structure with the intent to commit a felony. [Citation.]

Page 7

Thus, ordinarily, if the defendant commits both burglary and the underlying intended felony,... section 654 will permit punishment for one or the other but not for both." (People v. Centers (1999) 73 Cal.App.4th 84, 98-99, and cases cited therein.) It is improper to sentence a defendant for burglary and an underlying felony offense where the felonious entry was for the purpose of accomplishing the underlying felony. (Id. at p. 98; People v. Radil (1977) 76 Cal.App.3d 702, 713.)