Is a sentence for dissuading a witness and making a terrorist threat against a witness valid?

Section 654 provides, "An act or omission that is punishable in different ways by different provisions of law shall be punished under the provision that provides for the longest potential term of imprisonment, but in no case shall the act or omission be punished under more than one provision." "The purpose of section 654 is to prevent multiple punishment for a single act or omission, even though that act or omission violates more than one statute and thus constitutes more than one crime. Although the distinct crimes may be charged in separate counts and may result in multiple verdicts of guilt, the trial court may impose sentence for only one offensethe one carrying the highest punishment." (People v. Liu (1996) 46 Cal.App.4th 1119, 1134.)

It is clear the two convictions arose from the same conduct. During closing argument, the prosecutor contended that the dissuading a witness and making criminal threats charges pertained to the same conduct by defendant: grabbing Orona by the back of her head and threatening her and her family if she called the police. Accordingly, the concurrent sentence imposed for making a terrorist threat in count 3 must be stayed. (People v. Spirlin (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 119, 131 [the proper procedure for disposing of a term that violates section 654 is to impose and stay sentence on the lesser term].)