What is the test for a stalking conviction under section 654 of the California Criminal Code?

Here, the trial court could reasonably conclude for sentencing purposes that appellant's commission of stalking was a separate, completed crime before the burglary, and thus not subject to section 654. "The first element of stalking is 'willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follow[ing] or willfully and maliciously harass[ing] another person.' ( 646.9, subds. (a), (g).) . . . [] The second element is 'mak[ing] a credible threat,' which includes a threat implied by a pattern of conduct or a combination of verbal and written communicated statements and conduct. ( 646.9, subd. (g).) . . . [] The third element of stalking is intending to place the victim in reasonable fear for his or her safety." (People v. Uecker (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 583, 594-595.) The victim must actually have been in fear and that fear must be reasonable. (People v. Carron (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 1230, 1238.) "'"[T]he entire factual context, including the surrounding events and the reaction of the listeners, must be considered."' [Citation.] . . . [A] court 'cannot ignore what a victim

Page 9

knows about a defendant, regardless of how it is learned, in assessing whether a defendant's behavior rises to the level of a credible threat.' [Citation.]" (People v. McPheeters (2013) 218 Cal.App.4th 124, 138.)