3 ms·

If the crimes are similar, the judge is going to lump them together and pick the longest sentence as the one to serve. The rest will be served concurrently. T

If the crimes are similar, the judge is going to lump them together and pick the longest sentence as the one to serve. The rest will be served concurrently. This depends on the nature and scope of the crime. If there is one major crime and a number of smaller supporting crimes, judges will usually pick the longest sentence and the other sentences are imposed concurrently, the theory being that the smaller crimes are really just dependent parts of carrying out the bigger crime. If there are several major crimes, judges will frequently impose consecutive sentences, especially if there is a series or pattern of major crimes. (For example, serial rapists, serial murderers, etc.) Generally, this is rare for white collar crimes, with the exception of standouts like Bernie Madoff (serial fraud). Scope-wise, SBF has Madoff beat. And while he doesn't have the same length of offending as Madoff, he did commit a series of major crimes. It is thus realistic that the judge would sentence SBF to consecutive sentences if he is convicted on all counts.

dragonwriter 3y ago
> This depends on the nature and scope of the crime. If there is one major crime and a number of smaller supporting crimes, judges will usually pick the longest sentence and the other sentences are imposed concurrently, the theory being that the smaller crimes are really just dependent parts of carrying out the bigger crime. That might be the theory in state cases, in federal cases following the Sentencing Guidelines, that often happens because if the total punishment calculated for the combination of offenses fits into a sentence available for the single crime with the maximum available punishment, the guidelines instruct that it be done that way (and, if not, they instruct that enough of the other sentences run consecutively to meet the calculated total punishment.) This rule works independently of the structure of multiple major offenses or one major and many minor offenses, although it may tend to produce results roughly in line w8th the dichotomy you propose.

dragonwriter 3y ago

> This depends on the nature and scope of the crime. If there is one major crime and a number of smaller supporting crimes, judges will usually pick the longest sentence and the other sentences are imposed concurrently, the theory being that the smaller crimes are really just dependent parts of carrying out the bigger crime. That might be the theory in state cases, in federal cases following the Sentencing Guidelines, that often happens because if the total punishment calculated for the combination of offenses fits into a sentence available for the single crime with the maximum available punishment, the guidelines instruct that it be done that way (and, if not, they instruct that enough of the other sentences run consecutively to meet the calculated total punishment.) This rule works independently of the structure of multiple major offenses or one major and many minor offenses, although it may tend to produce results roughly in line w8th the dichotomy you propose.