Short answer. Yes. When two or more offenses are charged in a single complaint or information and the accused fails to object before trial, the court may convict him of as many offenses as are charged and proved, and impose the penalty for each one, with separate findings of fact and law for each offense.
What the law says
the court may convict him of as many offenses as are charged and proved, and impose on him the penalty for each offense, setting out separately the findings of fact and law in each offense
Rule 120, Section 3 — Judgment for two or more offenses. Read the full provision →
The rule and the waiver inside it
As a general matter, an information is supposed to charge one offence, and an accused served with one charging several may object to it. But the objection has an expiry date. The Rules provide that when two or more offenses are charged in a single complaint or information but the accused fails to object to it before trial, the defect is waived — and the trial proceeds on everything the information contains. Silence at the start of the case thus has a real price: the multiplicity of charges stops being a flaw you can invoke and becomes the operative shape of the prosecution.
Charged and proved — both words matter
Waiving the objection does not concede guilt on anything. The court may convict him of as many offenses as are charged and proved. Each offence in the information must still be established by the prosecution's evidence to the standard a criminal conviction demands; the waiver only removes the procedural objection to their being tried together. An accused who did not object can therefore still be acquitted of some counts and convicted of others — the fight simply shifts from the form of the information to the sufficiency of the proof on each offence it charges.
Separate penalties, separate findings
Conviction on multiple offences in one case is not a single blended judgment. The court is to impose on him the penalty for each offense, setting out separately the findings of fact and law in each offense. Each conviction must stand on its own reasoned footing — its own facts found, its own legal basis stated, its own penalty fixed. For the accused this matters on review: because the findings are separate, each conviction can be examined separately, and a weakness in the evidence for one offence is not papered over by the strength of another.
What this means for your position now
If trial has not yet begun, the objection to a multi-offence information is still available and should be raised now or lost. If trial is underway or done, the realistic questions become evidentiary: which of the charged offences did the prosecution actually prove, and does the judgment set out separate findings and penalties as the rule requires? Bring the information itself and the judgment, if one has issued, to counsel — the number of offences charged, and how the court treated each, determine both the exposure and the grounds worth pursuing.