In People v. Whitmer (2014) 59 Cal.4th 733, the California Supreme Court, interpreting People v. Bailey (1961), 55 Cal.2d 514 (Whitmer, supra, 59 Cal.4th at p. 741), held "a defendant may be convicted of multiple counts of grand theft based on separate and distinct acts of theft, even if committed pursuant to a single overarching scheme." (Whitmer, at p. 735; id. at p. 742.) However, Whitmer observed that post-Bailey, pre-Whitmer appellate cases interpreting Bailey (Whitmer, at pp. 739-740) had "consistently held that multiple acts of grand theft pursuant to a single scheme cannot support more than one count of grand theft." (Whitmer , at p. 742.) Those appellate cases were decided during the period from 1978 through 1987 and were the law at the time of the defendant's offenses. (Id. at pp. 735, 739, 742-743.) Whitmer disapproved those appellate cases to the extent they were inconsistent with Whitmer's interpretation of Bailey. (Id. at pp. 735, 741.) However, Whitmer stated, "given the numerous, and uncontradicted, appellate decisions over a long period of time that reached a conclusion contrary to ours, we believe today's holding is . . . an unforeseeable judicial enlargement of criminal liability for multiple grand thefts. Accordingly, that holding may not be applied to defendant." (Whitmer, supra, 59 Cal.4th at p. 742.) Thus, Whitmer concluded the defendant could not be convicted of more than one count of grand theft. (Ibid.)