California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Robles, F075573 (Cal. App. 2019):
Therefore, the question in our case is whether defendant's course of conduct was divisible or indivisible. (See People v. Cleveland (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 263, 267.) This determination "depends on the 'intent and objective' of the actor. [Citation.]" (Ibid.) "If all of the offenses are incident to one objective, the court may punish the defendant for any one of the offenses, but not more than one. [Citation.] If, however, the defendant had multiple or simultaneous objectives, independent of and not merely incidental to each other, the defendant may be punished for each violation committed in pursuit of each objective even though the violations share common acts or were parts of an otherwise indivisible course of conduct. [Citation.]" (Id. at pp. 267-268, italics added.)
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.