California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Lawrence, 24 Cal.4th 219, 6 P.3d 228, 99 Cal.Rptr.2d 570 (Cal. 2000):
We do not believe it was intended that the mandatory consecutive-sentencing provision of the three strikes law not apply to the commission of different crimes perpetrated against different groups of victims merely because the later crimes occurred while the defendant was still in flight from the initial crime scene. No principle of criminal law shields a defendant from conviction of all such offenses, nor does section 654 prohibit multiple punishment for crimes of violence against multiple victims. (People v. King (1993) 5 Cal.4th 59, 78, 19 Cal.Rptr.2d 233, 851 P.2d 27.) We find no basis for concluding the voters who enacted the initiative version of the three strikes law (or the drafters of the virtually identical legislative version) nonetheless intended that all offenses a defendant chooses to commit while still in flight from the first crime scene should be excluded from the scope of the mandatory consecutive-sentencing provision.
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.