California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Lundy, F065027 (Cal. App. 2014):
the offenses, but not more than one. [Citation.] If, however, the defendant had multiple or simultaneous objectives, independent of and not merely incidental to each other, the defendant may be punished for each violation committed in pursuit of each objective even though the violations share common acts or were parts of an otherwise indivisible course of conduct. [Citation.]" (People v. Cleveland (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 263, 267-268.)
Whether the defendant possessed multiple objectives and intents within the meaning of section 654 is a factual question. We will uphold a trial court's explicit or implicit finding if it is supported by substantial evidence. The trial court's determination is viewed in the light most favorable to the People, and we presume the existence of every fact that reasonably could be deduced from the evidence. (People v. Jones (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 1139, 1143.)
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.