Does the waiver doctrine apply to sentencing under section 654 of the Criminal Code?

^3. Defendant did not object to his sentence on this ground below. However, "the waiver doctrine does not apply to questions involving the applicability of section 654. Errors in the applicability of section 654 are corrected on appeal regardless of whether the point was raised by objection in the trial court or assigned as error on appeal." (People v. Perez (1979) 23 Cal.3d 545, 549-550, fn. 3.) In an apparent attempt to avoid this rule, the Attorney General argues that defendant is judicially estopped from raising this issue because he stated in his plea form that he could be sentenced to five years eight months. " ' "Judicial estoppel precludes a party from gaining an advantage by taking one position, and then seeking a second advantage by taking an incompatible position. [Citations.]" ' " (Aguilar v. Lerner (2004) 32 Cal.4th 974, 986.) The doctrine applies when a party takes two totally inconsistent positions in judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings, is successful in asserting the first position, and the first position was not taken as a result of ignorance, fraud, or mistake. (Id. at pp. 986-987.) We find entirely unpersuasive the Attorney General's argument that defendant's acknowledgement of the maximum possible penalty for his two crimeseven if incorrectmet these standards. We therefore consider the issue on the merits.

^4. "Because section 422 requires commission of an act which harms another, it is a crime of violence for purposes of the multiple-victim exception to section 654." (People v. Solis, supra, 90 Cal.App.4th at p. 1025.)