Yes, something like that. But it's more complicated. Now that he's here, he can try to plea bargain with the DOJ. I don't know how willing they'll be to cut a plea, given the circumstances. But if they choose, they could drop some of the charges in return for "cooperation". That would reduce the length of the overall sentence.
But assuming it goes to trial, and I think it will, once the trial is over and the jury has delivered its verdict, the prosecution will file a report explaining how much time he could get under the federal sentencing guidelines, and recommending what they feel would be an appropriate sentence.
The judge will act on that, though he could revise up or down. But he couldn't depart radically from the guidelines; he'd have to stay within them. Edwards's attorney could plead for a downward departure. The judge might also ask for a report from Edwards's probation officer.
Then there's a sentencing hearing, at which the attorneys can make final statements. Edwards could also present testimony from character witnesses. The prosecution could also present testimony from victims of the scam. Then the judge will announce the sentence. It will be specific: the total number of months to be served in prison, and the time he'll be on probation after that.
As you say, in the federal system, prisoners don't get a lot of time off for "good behavior" or the like. I think they must serve 85% of the sentence imposed. Theoretically, Edwards could appeal, but to be successful, he'd have to show judicial error. It's unlikely that would work.
I believe that's more or less right. Jarta would have a better idea than I, though.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
