California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Williams, C078843 (Cal. App. 2017):
issue defendant raised). We concluded that the trial court had misunderstood section 654, that is, it had legally erred and remanded for it to correct its ruling. "[A]n incorrect application of section 654 produces an unauthorized sentence which may be rectified on remand." (People v. Price (1986) 184 Cal.App.3d 1405, 1411; see also People v. Vizcarra (2015) 236 Cal.App.4th 422, 431-438.) This court remanded for the trial court to exercise its sentencing discretion and determine whether to impose a concurrent or consecutive sentence or stay sentence on count 2. On remand, the court exercised its sentencing discretion and imposed a consecutive one-third the midterm or one year eight months for count 2 plus one-third the midterm or three years four months for the gun use. The trial court did not err in imposing a consecutive sentence on count 2.
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.