What is the effect of consecutive misdemeanor sentences when determining a defendant’s proper place of confinement?

When a defendant is subject to multiple judgments, whether the court should determine the proper place of confinement by considering each sentence in isolation or considering the effect of any consecutive sentences is unclear. The statutory subsection describing which defendants should be sentenced to the Statewide Misdemeanant Confinement Program, G.S. 15A-1352(e), refers to “a misdemeanor” and “a sentence” in the singular, whereas subsection (a) says that a defendant should be committed to DAC if the “sentence or sentences” imposed require confinement of more than 180 days. An interpretation that takes both of those provisions into account is that consecutive sentences should not be aggregated when determining whether the defendant meets the 91-day floor for the SMCP but should be aggregated when determining whether sentences exceed the program’s 180-day ceiling.