California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from The People v. Flanagan, B214885, No. NA 072111 (Cal. App. 2010):
When the defendant commits more than one criminal act, section 654 has been interpreted to prohibit punishment under more than one provision if "all of the offenses were incident to one objective...." (Neal v. State of California (1960) 55 Cal.2d 11, 19.) "'If a course of criminal conduct causes the commission of more than one offense, each of which can be committed without committing any other, the applicability of section 654 will depend upon whether a separate and distinct act can be established as the basis of each conviction, or whether a single act has been so committed that more than one statute has been violated.'" (Ibid.) The rationale for the prohibition against multiple punishments is to ensure the defendant's punishment is "commensurate with his criminal liability." (Id. at p. 20.) Thus, one who commits an act of violence with the intent to harm more than one person or by a means likely to cause harm to several persons is more culpable than a defendant who harms only one person. (Ibid.)
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.