How have courts interpreted section 654 of the California Criminal Code in dealing with unlawful possession of a firearm and the concurrent possession of ammunition?

For their part, the People cite People v. Lopez (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 132, in which the defendant was found in possession of a loaded firearm and was convicted and sentenced to a term for unlawful possession of a firearm and a concurrent term for unlawful possession of ammunition. (Id. at p. 137.) The court in Lopez stated that "[t]o allow multiple punishment for possessing ammunition in a firearm would, in our judgment, parse the objectives too finely. While there may be instances when multiple punishment is lawful for possession of a firearm and ammunition, the instant case is not one of them. Where, as here, all of the ammunition is loaded into the firearm, an 'indivisible course of conduct' is present and section 654 precludes multiple punishment." (Lopez, at p. 138.) According to the People, "[t]he reasoning of Lopez is applicable in this instance" because "[a]lthough the gun was unloaded when discovered, the ammunition was found in the same . . . case between the wall and the refrigerator in the kitchen and was of the same caliber. In this case, the evidence demonstrates that [defendant] bought the firearm and ammunition at the same time, and the prosecution asserted that [he] possessed the gun and the ammunition for the same purpose, to benefit

Page 11

[his] gang. There is no evidence that [defendant] had separate purposes for possessing the gun and the ammunition."