concurrently, and ordered Jebril to pay restitution. DISCUSSION I. The Prior Conviction USSG § 4A1.2(a)(l) defines “prior sentence” to mean “any sentence previously imposed upon adjudication of guilt, whether by guilty plea, trial, or plea of nolo contendere, for conduct not part of the instant offense.” USSG § 4A1.2(a)(2) continues, stating, “Prior sentences imposed in unrelated cases are to be counted separately. Prior sentences imposed in related cases are to be treated as one sentence for purposes of’ a ntention, implying that [offenses] have been jointly planned, or at least that ... the commission of one would entail the commission of the other as well.” United States v. Irons, 196 F.3d 634, 638 (6th Cir.1999) (quoting United States v. Ali, 951 F.2d 827, 828 (7th Cir.1992)) (<HOLDING>). Furthermore, crimes are not necessarily
holding that the double jeopardy clause was not violated by two convictions arising from the same criminal episode because the crimes of attempted burglary and possession of burglary tools each had an element the other did not and were thus separate crimes holding that uncharged sexual acts committed upon the same victim are admissible to show the conduct of the defendant toward the victim and to corroborate the evidence of the offense charged in the indictment holding that under the crimes code conspiracy and the completed substantive offense are separate crimes holding that separate instances of harassment committed against the same victim were not related because the defendant did not jointly plan the crimes holding that two robberies committed within hours of each other were not part of a common scheme or plan when the defendant did not originally plan to rob his second victim