California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Rauda, 2d Crim. No. B258675 (Cal. App. 2015):
"The prohibition on multiple punishments in section 654 extends to a single act or an indivisible course of conduct. [Citation.] ' "Whether a course of criminal conduct is divisible and therefore gives rise to more than one act within the meaning of section 654 depends on the intent and objective of the actor. If all of the offenses were incident to one objective, the defendant may be punished for any one of such offenses but not for more than one." ' [Citation.]" (People v. Leonard (2014) 228 Cal.App.4th 465, 498-499.) " 'Whether the defendant held "multiple criminal objectives is primarily a question of fact for the trial court, whose finding will be upheld on appeal if there is any substantial evidence to support it." [Citations.]' [Citation.] We must 'view the evidence in a light most favorable to the respondent and presume in support of the order the existence of every fact the trier could reasonably deduce from the
Page 8
evidence. [Citation.]' [Citation.]" (People v. McGuire (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 687, 698.)
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.