People v. Gao CA2/8

facts of this case indicate a complete disregard for human life or human safety. After [trying to] blow up the property that was in dispute, and it didn’t work for some reason, he stood there outside the house and opened the door allowing the firefighters to be introduced to extreme danger and it was just good fortune that no one was hurt. [¶] . . . [¶] . . . [¶] . . . [¶] So, based on those facts alone, an extensive preparation and planning that he put into committing this crime, the court is going to elect on count 1 [attempted arson], the high term, which is three years.” The trial court continued: “As to count 2, [burglary], the court elects one-third the midterm, which is eight months.” The trial court ordered the sentences on counts 1 and 2 to run concurrently. Defendant timely appealed.

DISCUSSION

A. Concurrent Sentences on Counts 1 (Attempted Arson) and 2 (Burglary) Violated Section 654

Section 654 generally precludes multiple punishments for a single physical act that violates different provisions of law. (People v. Jones (2012) 54 Cal.4th 350, 358.) It also prohibits separate punishment when several crimes are committed during an indivisible

3 course of conduct.…