What are the implications of section 654 of the Criminal Code when a defendant is convicted of second degree burglary and second degree robbery?

"Where the commission of one offense is merely '"a means toward the objective of the commission of the other,"' section 654 prohibits separate punishments for the two offenses." (People v. Kurtenbach (2012) 204 Cal.App.4th 1264, 1288.) Viewing the record in the light most favorable to the judgment, we do not find substantial evidence to support an implied finding that the underlying burglary and robberies were committed in

Page 10

furtherance of separate criminal objectives. The facts are similar to those in People v. Le (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 925, which is cited and discussed in appellant's briefs. There, the defendant was convicted of second degree burglary and second degree robbery in connection with the theft of merchandise from a drugstore. The robbery conviction was based on the defendant's physical altercation with a store manager in a parking lot outside of the establishment as he was trying to flee the scene. (Id. at pp. 929-930.) The appellate court concluded that both offenses were the means of accomplishing the single intent of stealing merchandise and, therefore, consecutive sentencing on the burglary count violated section 654. (People v. Le, supra, at pp. 931-932.)