Criminal Appeal

Firearm Sentence Enhancements Not Subject To Prohibition Against Multiple Punishment

Accoridng to California Penal Code section 654 (PC 654), an act that is made punishable in different ways by different provisions of the Penal Code may be punished under either provision but not both. The ban on multiple punishment applies not only when there is one act in the ordinary sense, but also when the crimes arise as the result of an indivisible course of conduct.

California Penal Code section 12022.53 (PC 12022.53) provides substantial sentence enhancements for using a firearm in the commission of certain felonies.

In this case, the trial court imposed three enhancements pursuant to PC 12022.53 based on a single shot fired at a single victim during the simultaneous commission of three qualifying offenses. The defendant argued - and the Court of Appeal agreed - that PC 654 required the trial court to stay all but one of the sentence enhancements.

In a unaninous opinion, however, the California Supreme Court held that the sentence enhancement provisions of PC 12022.53 are not limited by the multiple punishment prohibition of PC 654. In the Supreme Court's view, the Legislature made clear that it intended to create a sentencing scheme unfettered by PC 654 when in enacted PC 12022.53.

Importantly, though, the Supreme Court once again stopped short of embracing the Attorney General's far-reaching argument that PC 654 never applies to sentence enhancements. Instead, it opted to "leave that question for another day." To be continued...

The unanimous opinion was authored by Justice Corrigan.

People v. Palacios, no. S132144 (Cal. Supreme Ct., filed 7/12/07)

Cal. Pen. Code sec. 654 Does Not Bar Multiple Punishment for Robbery (211) and Evading an Officer While Driving With Willful or Wanton Disregard for Safety (2800.2). People v. Williams, no. E033166 (Cal.Ct.App. 4/2, June 30, 2004) (partial publ.).