but penalties stack :) and not all agricultural recording would fall under trespass - many times it is people who are employed there who are doing the recording
Not sure why you're putting these here. These are not relevant to discussion we're having. We're talking about the sentencing phase and the rules determining concurrent sentences.
How are you going to get concurrent sentences for two things you can’t get convicted for — or sentenced for — simultaneously? My point is that what you are contemplating would not be possible. Obviously I’m missing something. What is it?
So why can't you get sentenced for trespassing and agricultural interference if you trespassed into a facility and recorded animals? I didn't see anything in UT laws preventing concurrent sentences for those. Why do you think those can't be sentenced together?
Now we will see why my previous comment was relevant.
A lesser included offense is an offense which itself constitutes one element of another offense. Under the doctrine of multiplicity, you may either be tried for the lesser included or the offense for which the lesser included is an element — but not both. To be charged with both would run afoul of the constitutional provisions limiting double jeopardy.
This is not part of any Utah statute, it’s a general constitutional principle under US law.
Do they, or are they concurrent stemming from the same act in UT?
"not all agricultural recording would fall under trespass"
True. Your example was breaking into a Beyond Meat plant, comparing trespass to interference. In that case, the penalties are similar.