P. v. Junior
This appeal presents the sometimes tricky problem of ascertaining whether, under Penal Code section 654,[1] assaults committed in the general course of an armed robbery are divisible from the robbery itself. Assaults committed to accomplish the robbery are not separately punishable, while assaults committed not to further the robbery but for some independent objective are separately punishable. Here, as in People v. Watts (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 1250 (Watts), the assaults occurred well after the robbery was under way, and those assaults were not “simply a means†of committing the robbery. (See id. at p. 1265.) The trial court’s conclusion these assaults were committed for separate objectives was amply supported by the evidence. We therefore affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Junior