The prosecutors’ recommendation for prison time in the case of Huffman, among the best-known of 33 parents charged in what the Justice Department has said is its largest-ever college admissions prosecution, offers insight into a question that has lingered over the case: Will some of the wealthy and well-connected parents implicated in the scandal end up serving time?
Huffman said last week that she intended to plead guilty to conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud. In a plea agreement, prosecutors said that Huffman’s crime corresponded to a federal sentencing guideline of four to 10 months in prison and that they would recommend a sentence at the low end of that range, along with a fine of $20,000 and 12 months of supervised release.
The federal sentencing guidelines are advisory, and judges may impose sentences that are either heavier or lighter than the advised range. The plea agreement also notes that Huffman “reserves the right to argue” that her crime actually corresponds to a lower guideline — of zero to six months of incarceration.
According to the charges, Huffman paid $15,000 to William Singer, a consultant at the center of the case, so that a proctor would correct some of her daughter’s answers on the SAT after the girl had finished the test and left. Singer has pleaded guilty to racketeering and other charges.
Twelve other parents charged in the case have said that they will plead guilty. Prosecutors are arguing for longer sentences than the one proposed for Huffman in several of the cases, because the parents are accused of paying more money as part of the scheme.
More than a dozen other parents, including actress Lori Loughlin and her husband, designer Mossimo Giannulli, have pleaded not guilty.
This article originally appeared in The New York Times.