In State v. Morrick, 147 Wis. 2d 185, 191, 432 N.W.2d 654 (Ct. App. 1988), Donald Morrick sought dual credit for two separately-imposed sentences. Morrick, 147 Wis. 2d at 188-89. Morrick argued that because one of his sentences did not begin immediately after the other, the sentences were not consecutive and were therefore concurrent for sentence credit purposes. Id. at 188. The Court rejected Morrick's argument. Id. The reason Morrick's sentences were not "consecutive" in the technical sense of the term was because the earlier sentence had long since been completed when the new sentence was imposed. Id. at 187.