AMP in the post
Chrisley Knows Best alum Julie Chrisley got her sentence for fraud vacated by the appeals court and Savannah Chrisley is already using that to try and find new ways to get her dad, Todd Chrisley out of jail. But, will it necessarily mean that her mom will get a reduced sentence? Read on to find out why that might not happen.
Julie Chrisley Will Be Resentenced
The resentencing of the Chrisley Knows Best alum will take place in Atlanta on September 25. As she was denied attending by Zoom, she might already be on her way there from the Kentucky prison facility. Savannah Chrisley already talked about how she hopes her mom might be home by Thanksgiving. But, that might not happen according to legal experts at Varghese Summerset.
Julie Chrisley was sent back for resentencing because of a so-called miscalculation that included crimes prior to 2007, for which the prosecution had not included evidence. So, technically, her sentence needs to account for one year less. Even so, deducting a year might not make any difference to her original 84-month prison term.
Savannah Chrisley Might Not Get Her Mom Home Early
It was Redditor u/Popular-Farmer1044 who came across the article that discussed why the sentence might not be reduced. They shared the link and said in their caption:
AMP in the post
https://versustexas.com/blog/julie-chrisley-resentencing/ I found this article that I feel is legitimate and explains how her sentence was calculated and J feel she might get more time actually.
I know Savannah wants her Mom home but her lawyers are snowing her for more money.
How do they not know this?
In the article, which is long and contains a lot of legal reasoning, basically, the writer argues that Julie Chrisley already got a sweet deal from the judge who could have easily sentenced her to more time. And, she won’t earn enough points to score a lesser sentence because of a single year.
The website article concluded:
Julie Chrisley’s sentence of 84 months reflects a considerable downward variance from both the PSR’s calculated range and the government’s recommended range. A downward variance, as applied in her case, considers a broader set of factors beyond the specific offense characteristics. Therefore, even if the loss amount were recalculated to result in a lower offense level, it might not lead to a further reduced sentence, given the judge’s extensive consideration of the § 3553(a) factors that warranted the existing downward variance.
AMP in the post
What are your thoughts about a professional legal company suggesting that Julie Chrisley might not get any reduced time, and pointing out that the judge already didn’t sentence her for as much time as they could have? Shout out in the comments below, and come back here often for all your Chrisley Knows Best news and updates.
SOURCE: Reddit.