In State v. Paige, 90 N.C. App. 142, 143, 369 S.E.2d 606, 606 (1988), the Court interpreted G.S. 15A-1344(d): As we read it, this section permits the trial court to impose a consecutive sentence when a suspended sentence is activated upon revocation of a probationary judgment without regard to whether the sentence previously imposed ran concurrently or consecutively. Thus, under this section, the trial court in the present case had the authority to order defendant's sentence for felonious breaking and entering to be served consecutively to his sentence for possession of stolen goods. In Paige, the original judgments entered upon the defendant's convictions of felonious breaking and entering and possession of stolen goods did not specify whether the sentences would run concurrently or consecutively. If a judgment fails to specify whether multiple sentences are to run consecutively or concurrently, the sentences run concurrently. See N.C. Gen. Stat. 15A-1354(a) (2005). The trial court, however, in activating the defendant's suspended sentences, specified that the sentences should run consecutively. the Court upheld the trial court's ruling.