Latest Breaking News

He was REQUIRED to do the resentencing with a reduction, due to the Supreme Court's ruling on the obstruction charge. That charge had to be dismissed, and the sentence reduced accordingly.

The original sentence was six years, at the high end of the sentencing guidelines. Removing the obstruction charge brought the sentencing guidelines to between 18 and 24 months. The judge only removed one year, leaving Bru with a five year sentence.

So the guidelines now only call for a maximum of two years, but the judge still left him with five. He did the mandatory resentencing/reduction, but only took off a year. The sentence now exceeds the guidelines, but the judge has Bru's courtroom conduct to justify it. He did what was required of him, but mitigated the reduction as best he could, imo.