What is the test for a motion to stay three of the four concurrent life sentences imposed on an appellant for four counts of attempted murder pursuant to section 654?

Appellant contends that the trial court should have stayed three of the four concurrent life sentences imposed for the four attempted murder counts pursuant to section 654 because all four convictions arose from acts furthering the single objective of attempting to kill the victim.³ Respondent contends that because each conviction resulted from a separate volitional act divisible by time and intent, the sentencing court properly denied defendant's request to stay the sentences. A section 654 analysis requires us to consider whether appellant fired each gunshot in furtherance of a single intent and objective, or multiple intents and objectives. (See People v. Latimer (1993) 5 Cal.4th 1203, 1208 (Latimer).)⁴

Page 4