Error and/or relief
It was error to impose sentence on both the murder and the burglary. Because the court has discretion to choose which sentence to execute and which to stay, the matter is remanded.
First Holding:
Section 654 precludes multiple punishments for an indivisible course of conduct. For example, when a defendant is convicted of burglary and the intended felony underlying the burglary, section 654 prohibits punishment for both crimes. A claim of error under section 654 is nonwaivable.
Authority:
PEN 654
People v. Centers (1999) 73 Cal.App.4th 84, 98
People v. Islas (2012) 210 Cal.App.4th 116, 130
People v. Scott (1994) 9 Cal.4th 331, 354, fn. 17
Second Holding:
Here, murder was the felony underlying the prosecution’s burglary theory, so the trial court erred by imposing consecutive sentences for both crimes. Because the trial court has discretion to decide which sentence should be stayed, remand is required.
Authority:
PEN 654
People v. Mani (2022) 74 Cal.App.5th 343, 379