That 115 years. That’s just the statutory maximum for all the counts added together. That’s nowhere near, uh, you know, the plausible sentence he would get, I think under the guidelines, these numbers are so huge, you have to keep in mind and under our federal guidelines, the sentence is really pegged to the dollar amount of the loss. The dollar amount here, the government will argue is literally off the charts. It’s, it’s higher than the maximum number uh in the guidelines charts, which is pretty astonishing. So it’s possible that he could get 30 years in prison. But honestly, I don’t think that’s going to happen. Um, uh, my, my thinking would be if you want me to elaborate on that, let me know. But my thinking would be, go ahead. I’m sorry. Well, it would, it be served concurrently and, uh, what are the minimums that he would, he would be facing here? I’m not sure there are minimums for these statutes. It’s a good question. I don’t think the sentence is gonna be consecutive. They don’t usually do that. Um, they’re gonna be concurrent sentences. Um, if they need to add them together they will to get to the appropriate sentence. Uh, but I, I would think 15 years, something in the neighborhood of 15 years, or maybe even 20 years on the reasoning that he’s a relatively young man. His whole life is in front of him. I don’t think the judge is gonna, gonna wanna destroy his, uh, uh, chances of having a, a full and productive adult life if he did 30 years, uh, he would be in his mid ff before he got out of prison. I don’t, I don’t think the judge is gonna do that. I think he’s gonna give him a, a chance to redeem himself, so to speak.
- Howard Levitt: Why a good lawyer never ignores the court of public opinion
- Brian Laundrie's notebook reveals confession in Gabby Petito's death
- Attorneys fight to 'correct' long prison sentence
- Greitens RINO video spurred threats to family, lawyer says
- Judge denies district attorney's request to withdraw John Henry Ramirez's execution date