The 74 year old former Hollywood producer was convicted last year of committing a first degree criminal sexual act against Miriam Haley at his SoHo apartment. On Wednesday, Judge Curtis Farber of State Supreme Court in Manhattan gave him the 15 year prison term along with five years of post release supervision.

Prosecutors had asked for 20 years, while the defense had asked for nine.

How the Case Reached This Point

Weinstein was first convicted in 2020 and sentenced to 23 years. That conviction was later overturned by New York’s highest court in 2024 after the court ruled that the original trial had been unfair because of certain testimony that was allowed. A new trial was ordered. At the 2025 retrial, a jury found him guilty on the charge involving Haley.

Other related charges ended in acquittal or mistrial and were later dropped.

Haley has said the encounter took place in July 2006 after Weinstein invited her to his apartment the night before a premiere. She had worked briefly on the reality series Project Runway, which Weinstein’s company produced.

What Was Said at Sentencing

In court, Weinstein said he was not a perfect person and expressed remorse for Haley’s pain, while still saying he was innocent. Haley also spoke and later told reporters she viewed the 15-year sentence as fair, though she added that for her personally it would never fully feel that way.

Judge Farber noted Weinstein’s former power in the film industry and said he would be remembered less as a successful producer and more as a central figure in the #MeToo movement that followed the public accusations against him.

What Comes Next

Weinstein has already spent several years in custody related to these and other cases. He also faces a separate resentencing in California. The New York sentence requires him to register as a sex offender.

If You or Someone You Love Needs Serious Legal Help

Cases involving sexual assault carry a heavy weight no matter which side of the accusation you are on. If you are a survivor seeking guidance, or if you believe you or a loved one has been falsely accused and need experienced legal support, leave your details on the contact form.

We work with people in both situations and will treat your case with care, clarity, and respect.

Anthony and Joseph Livreri entered guilty pleas in Manhattan Supreme Court to conspiracy and bribery charges. They admitted paying $4,000 to Eric Ulrich between 2021 and 2022. Ulrich previously served as Buildings Department commissioner and earlier as a senior adviser to Mayor Eric Adams.

What the Brothers Admitted in Court

According to the plea, the money was paid to lift a vacate order on Fortunato Brothers Bakery in Williamsburg. The bakery had been shut down after a fire. Prosecutors have also pointed to broader efforts by the brothers to seek Ulrich’s help with faster inspections and other business matters. Those additional claims come from the government. The plea itself is limited to the $4,000 payments and the bakery order.

The Livreris co-own Aldo’s pizzeria in Ozone Park. Under the terms of their agreement, they will not cooperate against Ulrich if called to testify and would invoke their Fifth Amendment rights. Sentencing is scheduled for December. Joseph Livreri faces a possible sentence of up to six months in jail and five years of probation. Anthony Livreri faces five years of probation.

Ulrich’s Separate Case

Ulrich continues to face multiple corruption charges and has pleaded not guilty. His case is expected to proceed to trial. The brothers’ plea resolves only a portion of the original accusations filed when they were charged alongside him in 2023. The remaining counts against Ulrich remain allegations until a court decides otherwise.

What Comes After a Guilty Plea

Once a defendant enters a guilty plea, the focus shifts to sentencing. The judge considers the specific facts admitted in court, the amount of money involved, and the individual circumstances of the person before the court. At that stage, the defense works to ensure the judge receives a complete and accurate picture before deciding on a sentence.

Public corruption cases in New York carry serious consequences. A plea does not close every question. Sentencing terms, limits on cooperation, and any related investigations can still shape the final outcome. Anyone facing charges is entitled to a careful, prepared defense. That is a legal right. It is not a statement about the underlying conduct.

Facing White-Collar or Public Corruption Charges in New York?

At Bukh Law P.A., we have dealt with and represented people charged with white-collar offenses in Brooklyn.

If by matter of circumstances you or a family member has been charged, or has received a target letter or grand jury subpoena, don’t risk it all alone. Seek legal justice by taking the first step of reaching out to us for assistance.

Use the contact form on our website and request a confidential phone conversation.

Angela Aquino entered the plea on August 20 before U.S. Magistrate Judge Vera Scanlon. She faces up to 20 years in prison if she is convicted. The case was announced by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York, the New York City Department of Investigation, and the FBI.

What Prosecutors Said Happened

Under the city’s campaign finance rules, a candidate who raised $125,000 in qualifying contributions could receive up to $1 million in public matching funds. Prosecutors said Aquino knew her campaign had not legitimately reached that threshold and took steps to make it look as if it had.

In early 2025 more than $130,000 from the Philippines landed in her personal bank account, including at least $34,000 described as a loan. Cash was repeatedly withdrawn and deposited into the campaign account. Contribution cards were submitted that made the money appear to come from New York City residents.

Some campaign funds were also used for personal expenses, including rent, while being reported as legitimate campaign costs.

How These Cases Usually Move

Federal campaign finance prosecutions often rest on bank records, contribution filings, and statements made to investigators. Once a defendant admits the core conduct in a plea, the remaining fight usually centers on the guidelines calculation, the amount of loss, and any acceptance of responsibility credit.

Judges look closely at whether the scheme actually succeeded in drawing public money and how sophisticated the paper trail was.

From the defense side, the early decisions about what to concede, what to contest, and how to present the defendant’s role tend to shape the sentencing range more than later arguments. Cases that begin with overseas wire transfers and falsified donor records rarely turn on a single disputed fact. They turn on the overall pattern the government can prove.

When Federal Charges Hit Close to Home

A guilty plea in a case like this does not end the legal work. Sentences still have to be prepared, the guidelines still have to be calculated, and the defendant still has the right to put the strongest available mitigation in front of the judge. That work is exacting and personal. It is not about defending the underlying conduct.

It is about making sure the court sees the full picture of the person standing in front of it before a sentence is imposed.

Bukh Law, P.A. handles federal criminal matters in Brooklyn and the Eastern District. If you or someone in your family is facing sentencing or still fighting charges in federal court, use the contact form on our website and request a free phone conversation.

Bring the paperwork you have. We will sit with the actual record and talk through what can still be done.

Dan Sohail, 36, appeared in Brooklyn federal court before Judge Eric N. Vitaliano. Prosecutors had asked for a longer sentence, but the judge declined that recommendation.

Because Sohail has already spent about six months in detention, he is expected to be released in roughly a week. He was also ordered to pay $20,000 in restitution.

What Happened in January

On Jan. 28, Sohail drove his car into a side entrance of the building at 770 Eastern Parkway five times, knocking the door off its hinges and damaging the front of his vehicle. No one was injured.

Before he drove toward the entrance, he waved people away from the area.

The complex includes a synagogue and offices and was busy at the time. The crash took place on the 75th anniversary of Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson becoming the leader of the Lubavitch movement.

The Court’s Decision

Federal prosecutors charged Sohail with intentionally damaging religious property. He pleaded guilty in mid-May. At sentencing, the government argued for a stiffer term as a deterrent, noting the sharp rise in hate crimes against Jewish people and institutions in New York City this year.

Judge Vitaliano said he was “somewhat saddened” that the Justice Department wanted him to be influenced by the early public impression that the incident was a hate crime or act of terrorism. He pointed to a psychiatric report showing that mental health challenges played a significant role in Sohail’s actions.

Defense attorney Mia Eisner-Grynberg told the court that Sohail was dealing with depression and post-traumatic stress after a difficult childhood.

She said he had been trying to connect with Judaism, had attended the Chabad, and found the students there welcoming. After a trip to Israel he became increasingly anxious and erratic. She described the crash as “an irrational cry for help.”

When Mental Health and Criminal Charges Overlap

Cases that begin with a dramatic public incident often look one way in the early media coverage and another once psychiatric evaluations and full facts reach the courtroom. Judges regularly weigh mental health history, the absence of injury, and the defendant’s actions before and after the event when deciding a sentence. The gap between public reaction and the legal outcome can be wide.

Anyone facing federal charges that involve religious property, questions of intent, or significant mental health issues benefits from counsel who can present the full picture to the court.

Facing Federal Charges in Brooklyn?

Sentencing decisions in cases like this one show how much weight courts give to mental health evidence, the actual harm caused, and the defendant’s personal history. If you or a family member is dealing with federal or state charges in Brooklyn or elsewhere in New York, the right legal approach can shape the outcome more than most people realize.

Use the contact form here on our website to request a free phone conversation. We will review the details of your case and explain the practical options available.