> Obviously prosecutors always present things in the worst possible way for defendants ...

True, that is their job.

Problem is, it is the judge's job to determine appropriate punishment for the crime once it is proven the defendant is responsible for same.

30 years (360 months) for a first time offender is roughly equivalent to Second Degree Murder (see section 2A1.2 here[0]). Even assuming the defendant has 13 or more felony convictions, this sentence would be roughly equivalent to Child Exploitation Enterprises (see section 2G2.6 here[0]).

The calculation of sentence length is based on the 2025 guidelines published here[1].

0 - https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/guidelines-manu...

1 - https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/guidelines-manu...

▲

dmix an hour ago | parent [-]

That sentence very likely won't hold up on appeal as it's obviously very very excessive and non-standard. That said, I don't believe the commenters above were defending the sentencing. They were debating whether it was a legitimate charge and whether the article explained it fairly.

	▲	AdieuToLogic 14 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> That sentence very likely won't hold up on appeal as it's obviously very very excessive and non-standard. Probably. But put yourself in the defendant's shoes when the sentence was handed down. And then imagine what comfort is had by someone saying it "likely won't hold up on appeal". > That said, I don't believe the commenters above were defending the sentencing. They were debating whether it was a legitimate charge and whether the article explained it fairly. Agreed. I do not think the commenters were defending the sentencing and perhaps not considering it. What I sought to provide was recognizing the punishment must fit the crime.