California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. D.R. (In re D.R.), A149305 (Cal. App. 2017):
In determining the applicability of Penal Code section 654, courts consider whether a defendant had one or multiple criminal objectives. (People v. Conners
Page 7
(2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 443, 458.) "Thus: 'If all of the crimes were merely incidental to, or were the means of accomplishing or facilitating one objective, a defendant may be punished only once. [Citation.] If, however, a defendant had several independent criminal objectives, he may be punished for each crime committed in pursuit of each objective, even though the crimes shared common acts or were parts of an otherwise indivisible course of conduct.' " (Ibid.) " 'It is defendant's intent and objective, not the temporal proximity of his offenses, which determine whether the transaction is indivisible.' " (People v. Hicks (1993) 6 Cal.4th 784, 789.) " 'Whether the facts and circumstances reveal a single intent and objective within the meaning of Penal Code section 654 is generally a factual matter; the dimension and meaning of section 654 is a legal question.' " (People v. Dowdell (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 1388, 1414.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.