California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. J.C. (In re J.C.), B252637 (Cal. App. 2014):
Kristian had been rendered helpless by blows that had fractured his jaw in several places, and if so, whether the whipping was an act of gratuitous violence against a helpless victim and thus not incidental to the attempted robbery for purposes of section 654. (See People v. Nguyen (1988) 204 Cal.App.3d 181, 190 [an act of gratuitous violence against a helpless and unresisting victim has traditionally been viewed as not incidental to robbery for purposes of section 654]; see also People v. Cleveland (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 263, 271-272 [sufficient evidence that defendant harbored divisible intents in committing robbery and attempted murder when he repeatedly hit feeble, unresisting victim with two-by-four, using far more force than necessary to achieve one objective].) Based on its determination under section 654, the court shall then recalculate the appropriate maximum period of confinement.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.