What is the proper procedure for disposing of a term barred by section 654?

The court erred. The proper procedure for disposing of a term barred by section 654 is to impose it and then stay the term. (See People v. Dominguez (1995) 38 Cal.App.4th 410, 420.) The same procedure applies to enhancements. (People v. Vega (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 1387, 1395-1396; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.447.)

Nevels argues that we should remand the matter to the trial court for resentencing on the stayed enhancements. (See People v. Crabtree (2009) 169 Cal.App.4th 1293, 1327.) In response, the People state that, in order "to avoid an unnecessary remand," the People would have no objection to this court imposing the midterms for the great bodily injury enhancements, imposing the one-year term for the dangerous weapon enhancements, and then staying imposition of the terms.

We would be inclined to agree with the People's approach if the dispute were limited to the one-year dangerous weapon enhancements ( 12022, subd. (b)(1)), because it would be pointless to remand the matter simply to require the trial court to impose and then stay a specified term where the court has no discretion in setting the term. In such a case, a reviewing court may simply impose and then stay the specified term. (See People v. Vega, supra, 214 Cal.App.4th at p. 1397.) Here, however, the dispute is not limited to

Page 11