Does the Court have the authority to stay execution of a sentence for possession of cocaine base on the same charge?

This reasoning is applicable in the instant case. Appellant was found guilty of two offenses, possession of cocaine base and transportation of cocaine base, arising out of the same act of carrying the contraband in an automobile in his possession. The appropriate procedure was not to invalidate the conviction of the lesser offense, but " 'to eliminate the effect of the judgment as to the lesser offense insofar as the penalty alone is concerned.' " (People v. Pearson, supra, 42 Cal.3d at pp. 359-360, 228 Cal.Rptr. 509, 721 P.2d 595, quoting People v. [231 Cal.App.3d 307] McFarland (1962) 58 Cal.2d 748, 762-763, 26 Cal.Rptr. 473, 376 P.2d 449.) Here the trial court properly eliminated the punitive consequences of the double conviction by staying execution of the sentence on the simple possession count. There was no error in allowing both convictions to stand.