Does section 654 of the California Criminal Code apply to a defendant who has a history of criminal activity as a repeat offender?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Manila, 138 Cal.App.4th 1459, 42 Cal.Rptr.3d 340 (Cal. App. 2006):

"[W]e observe there are at least two types of sentence enhancements: (1) those which go to the nature of the offender; and (2) those which go to the nature of the offense. [Citations.] Prior prison term enhancements ... fall into the first category and are attributable to the defendant's status as a repeat offender. [Citations.] The second category of enhancements ... arise from the circumstances of the crime and typically focus on what the defendant did when the current offense was committed." (People v. Coronado, supra, 12 Cal.4th at pp. 156-157, 48 Cal.Rptr.2d 77, 906 P.2d 1232.)

The enhancements at issue in the case were based on prior offenses and were status enhancements to which section 654 did not apply. The court explained that status enhancements like these "are not imposed for `acts or omissions' within the meaning of the statute...." (People v. Coronado, supra, 12 Cal.4th at p. 157, 48 Cal.Rptr.2d 77, 906 P.2d 1232.) These enhancements "are attributable to the defendant's status as a repeat offender [citations]; they are not attributable to the underlying criminal conduct which gave rise to the defendant's prior and current convictions." Therefore, "[b]ecause the repeat offender (recidivist) enhancement imposed here does not implicate multiple punishment of an act or omission, section 654 is inapplicable." (Id. at p. 158, 48 Cal.Rptr.2d 77, 906 P.2d 1232.)

The court expressed no opinion about whether section 654 applies to the second category, enhancements based on conduct rather than status. (People v. Coronado, supra, 12 Cal.4th at p. 157, 48 Cal.Rptr.2d 77, 906 P.2d 1232.) The court's reasoning, however, strongly implies that section 654 does apply to those enhancements. In the court's view, section 654 does not apply to status enhancements because, by its terms, section 654 only prohibits double punishment for a single criminal "act or omission." (Pen.Code, 654.) A prior conviction enhancement, for instance, imposes punishment for the status of having priors or being a recidivist, not for an act or omission. A conduct or nature-of-the-offense enhancement, by contrast, does impose punishment for an act or omission, "typically ... what the defendant did when the current offense was committed." (People v. Coronado, supra, 12 Cal.4th at p. 157, 48 Cal.Rptr.2d 77, 906 P.2d 1232.) It is only a short logical step to the conclusion

[42 Cal.Rptr.3d 345]

that section 654 applies to conduct enhancements.

Other Questions


Does section 27 of the California Criminal Code, section 778a, subdivision (a)(1) of the Criminal Code of California apply to a defendant who is charged with a charge of conspiracy to commit a crime committed outside of the state? (California, United States of America)
Does Section 186.22, subdivision (a) of the California Criminal Code punish a person who actively participates in any criminal street gang with knowledge that its members engage in or have engaged in criminal gang activity? (California, United States of America)
Can a defendant be convicted of both counts of membership of a criminal street gang and a charge of criminal activity under section 654 of the California Criminal Code? (California, United States of America)
Can a defendant be found to have committed a single physical act for purposes of section 654 of the California Criminal Code, Section 215 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Section 422 of the Criminal Code for carjacking? (California, United States of America)
Does section 1202.4 of the California Criminal Code require a defendant to pay restitution for economic loss caused by the criminal activity that formed the basis of the criminal conviction? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for reversal of a conviction under section 186.22 of the California Criminal Code when a defendant has been convicted of a charge of criminal activity committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang? (California, United States of America)
Can a self-represented defendant be found guilty of a criminal act against a criminal defendant under section 352 of the California Criminal Code? (California, United States of America)
Does a defendant's lifetime sex offender registration under section 290 of the California Criminal Code apply to a sex offender treatment program? (California, United States of America)
Does Section 186.22 of the California Criminal Code punish a person who actively participates in any criminal street gang with knowledge that its members engage in or have engaged in criminal gang activity? (California, United States of America)
Does section 1305, subdivision (b) of the California Criminal Code, section 977 of the Criminal Code apply to a defendant's right to be present at trial? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.