> Okay, but he already knows that's not how it works, as he was not sentenced by adding up the maximum possible sentences for each of his crimes. Yes, he was.

> Okay, but he already knows that's not how it works, as he was not sentenced by adding up the maximum possible sentences for each of his crimes. Yes, he was. https://www.justice.gov/media/785641/dl?inline https://www.justice.gov/media/785641/dl?inline I look then to Section 5G1.2{d) of the guidelines, which tells us that where there are multiple counts, and the guideline range exceeds the statutory maximum for the most serious count, the court must impose consecutive terms of imprisonment to the extent necessary to achieve the total punishment. There is a little bit of ambiguity, however, as to what is meant by "total punishment" where the guideline calculation calls for ~ife imprisonment, but Second Circuit case law makes clear that in such a situation, the district court is to stack or add up the maximum sentences for all the counts. In United States v. Evans, for example, 352 F.3d 65, where the guideline calculation called for life imprisonment but no count carried a life sentence, the court held that the guideline range is 240 years, the maximum sentences for all the counts added together. Accordingly, here the guideline range is not life imprisonment, but 150 years, the maximum sentences for each of the 11 counts added together.