How has section 654 of the California Vehicle Robbery and Carjacking Act been interpreted?

for robberythe felonious taking of another's personal property by force.³ Precisely the same action, not a separate but related one taken at a separate time or in a distinct fashion, was also the basis for the contention that the defendant completed the actus reus for carjackingthe felonious taking of another's motor vehicle by force.⁴ It was the same show of forcecommitted at the same time, by the same personthat yielded for Corpening and his coconspirators the rare coins contained within the carjacked van, giving rise to the robbery conviction. Neither offense was accomplished until completion of the single forceful taking identified by the prosecution as the basis for conviction under the carjacking and robbery statutes. These circumstances render it all but impossible to accept the contrary contention that the forceful taking in this case constitutes multiple physical acts for purposes of section 654. (Cf. People v. Vargas (2014) 59 Cal.4th 635, 638, 174 Cal.Rptr.3d 277, 328 P.3d 1020 [holding that a defendant's prior felony convictions, "one for robbery and one for carjacking," did not qualify as separate strikes for purposes of sentence enhancement where they "were based on the same act, committed at the same time, against the same victim"].)