Does section 654 of the Criminal Code require a firearm enhancement under section 12022.5?

Contrary to defendant's argument in his opening brief, however, the abstract of judgment cannot merely be amended to correct what he characterizes as clerical errors. And section 654 does not preclude punishment in count 1 for personal use of a firearm under section 12022.5, as he alternatively argues. (See People v. Oates (2004) 32 Cal.4th 1048, 1065 [implicit in the holding of In re Tameka C. (2000) 22 Cal.4th 190 "is our conclusion that section 654 does not preclude imposition of multiple enhancements for a single firearm use involving multiple victims"].) As respondent contends, the trial court was obliged to impose the firearm enhancement under section 12022.5, subdivision (a) in count 1. The imposition of the enhancement under section 12022.5, subdivision (a) is mandatory. (See People v. Ledesma (1997) 16 Cal.4th 90, 100-102; People v. Turner (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 1258, 1269 [failure to impose mandatory enhancement results in an unauthorized sentence].)