It’s been increased to “more than 15 years” rather than “more than 10 years”, because Judge Fuller has just now been persuaded that Siegelman damaged public confidence in state government by his actions. Sorry, but something smells wrong here. Seems to me that any public official convicted of taking a bribe inherently damages the public’s confidence in government and that the judge would have taken that into consideration in his initial findings.
I’ll just point out again that there’s no way Don Siegelman should serve more time than Randy “Duke” Cunningham, who got eight years and four months for a massive multi-million dollar corruption scheme from which he profited mightily. And how is it again that Guy Hunt, who was convicted of stealing $200,000 for his own personal use while serving as governor, ended up with five years’ probation?