What is the test for appellate judges to determine whether a defendant has been convicted and sentenced to two consecutive sentences under section 654 of the California Criminal Code?

findings and presume the existence of every fact the trial court could reasonably deduce from the evidence. (People v. Jones (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 1139, 1143.)

It is judicial action and not judicial reasoning that is the subject of appellate review. (People v. Dawkins (2014) 230 Cal.App.4th 991, 1004.) Regardless of the trial court's rationale for imposing consecutive sentences, we determine whether such action was legally correct. (Ibid.)

Section 654, subdivision (a) provides that "[a]n 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 ensure that a defendant's punishment is commensurate with his culpability and that he is not punished more than once for what is essentially one criminal act." (People v. Kwok (1998) 63 Cal.App.4th 1236, 1252.)