Under section 654 of section 12022.53 of the California Criminal Code, can a defendant be sentenced to two or more enhancements to the underlying crime?

This interpretation, however, misreads Palacios. The question before our high court in Palacios was not whether section 654 prohibits multiple sentences; the question was whether section 654 prohibits multiple enhancements under section 12022.53 where section 654 did not prohibit multiple punishment for the underlying offenses. ( Palacios, supra, 41 Cal.4th at p. 723, 62 Cal.Rptr.3d 145, 161 P.3d 519.) ¹⁶ Palacios thus does not support the trial court's conclusion. Rather, as made clear in People v. Oates (2004) 32 Cal.4th 1048, 1066, 12 Cal.Rptr.3d 325, 88 P.3d 56, "[t]he subdivision (d) enhancements [of section 12022.53] 'simply follow from' [defendant's] conviction on those 'substantive offenses.' [Citation.] They 'do not constitute separate crimes or offenses, but simply are the basis for the imposition of additional punishment for the underlying substantive offense. [Citation.]' [Citation.]." (See also People v. Mustafaa (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 1305, 1310, 28 Cal.Rptr.2d 172 ( Mustafaa ) ["[t]he procedure for sentencing a person convicted of two or more felonies does not contemplate imposing an enhancement separately from the underlying crime"].) Both the prosecutor and defense counsel thus erroneously informed the court that Palacios prohibited the court from exercising its authority under section 654 to stay the punishment for the underlying crimes and their enhancements.