Reyes-Tornero

INTRODUCTION

Defendant/appellant Jose Manuel Reyes-Tornero approached four men at an outdoor card game. He pointed a gun at each of them and demanded their wallets. One of the men, Efren Cisneros, 1 refused to surrender his wallet and a struggle ensued wherein defendant shot Efren, causing great bodily injury. None of the other three card players were injured.

Defendant was convicted of four counts of assault with a firearm, among other crimes. The jury found true allegations that defendant had inflicted great bodily injury (GBI) on Efren specifically with respect to each of the four assaults.

Defendant contends that Penal Code section 654 2 prohibits multiple punishment on multiple great bodily injury enhancements relating to the same injuries to the same individual. Citing People v. Oates (2004) 32 Cal.4th 1048 [ 12 Cal.Rptr.3d 325 , 88 P.3d 56 ] (Oates), the Attorney General responds that *371 the multiple victim exception to section 654 applies because there were multiple victims of the several assaults to which the GBI enhancements were attached.

Under Oates , the relevant “act[s] or omission[s]” are the assaults and the GBI enhancements “simply follow from”…

I write separately to offer additional thoughts on defendant’s claim under Penal Code section 654. 1 Though the *380 judgment must be affirmed, I also note that this is not the result I would reach absent People v. Oates (2004) 32 Cal.4th 1048 [ 12 Cal.Rptr.3d 325 , 88 P.3d 56 ] (Oates). (See, e.g., People v. Calles (2012) 209 Cal.App.4th 1200, 1218-1224 [ 147 Cal.Rptr.3d 673 ].)

A. Oates

In the Oates decision, discussed at length in the court’s opinion above, the Supreme Court held: ‘“[W]e conclude that section 654 does not preclude imposition of multiple subdivision (d) enhancements based on the single injury to [the victim]. Under the ‘multiple victim’ exception to section 654, defendant may be punished for each of the attempted murder offenses he committed when he fired at the [] group. The subdivision (d) enhancements ‘simply follow from’ his convictions on those ‘substantive offenses.’ [Citation.] They ‘do not constitute separate crimes or offenses, but simply are the basis for the imposition of additional punishment for the underlying substantive offense. [Citation.]’ ” (Oates, supra, 32 Cal.4th at p. 1066 .)

Though Oates's facts are not identical to those of the present…