Julie Chrisley was resentenced on September 25, 2024, and received the same seven-year prison term she had originally received. The Eleventh Circuit had ordered a narrower review of how losses from 2006 were attributed to her; it did not overturn her convictions. Later, President Donald Trump pardoned her in 2025, and the Associated Press reported in June 2026 that she had been released.
Why was Julie Chrisley resentenced?
In June 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the Chrisleys’ convictions but vacated Julie’s sentence over the calculation of losses tied to her conduct. The sentencing court had included losses from loans issued in 2006, but the appellate panel said the record did not identify specific evidence that Julie was involved in the conspiracy that year. It found sufficient evidence of her involvement as of 2007.
| # | Preview | Product | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
![Chrisley Knows Best: Season One [DVD]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51+dH-1jFUL._SL160_.jpg)
|
Chrisley Knows Best: Season One [DVD] | $11.89 | Buy on Amazon |
| 2 |
![Today You Die [DVD]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51t-2kWa1wL._SL160_.jpg)
|
Today You Die [DVD] | $16.99 | Buy on Amazon |
The issue was not whether the jury’s verdicts stood. It was whether the losses used to calculate Julie’s sentence were properly attributed to her. The panel said a sentencing court must make individualized findings about the scope of a defendant’s criminal activity. Its remand was limited to findings and calculations for Julie’s loss, restitution and forfeiture amounts, followed by resentencing. The court did not set the correct amount.
The Eleventh Circuit summarized its order in United States v. Peter Tarantino, No. 22-14074: “So we vacate Julie’s sentence and remand solely for the district court to make the factual findings and calculations necessary to determine loss, restitution, and forfeiture as to Julie and to resentence her accordingly.” Todd Chrisley’s sentence was left undisturbed.
#1 Best Overall
What sentence did she receive on resentencing?
U.S. District Judge Eleanor Ross resentenced Julie Chrisley on September 25, 2024, to seven years in prison, the same term as before. The Associated Press reported that the judge declined the defense request for a sentence of no more than five years.
The Eleventh Circuit opinion discussed testimony that the loss and restitution amount would fall to $4.7 million if loans issued before July 11, 2007, were excluded. That was a figure from the appellate record, not the appellate court’s final determination of the amount. The Department of Justice’s Office of the Pardon Attorney later listed her sentence as 84 months’ imprisonment, three years of supervised release and $4,740,645.04 in restitution, with the record amended on the resentencing date.
What happened after the resentencing?
The resentencing did not remain the final word on her custody. Julie Chrisley appears on the Justice Department’s clemency list among grants dated May 28, 2025. In a June 2026 report, the Associated Press said that Julie and Todd Chrisley had been released after President Donald Trump pardoned them in 2025. The resentencing result and the later pardon are distinct events: the former set her sentence, while the latter preceded her reported release.
Rank #2
What was the underlying case about?
A federal jury convicted Todd and Julie Chrisley in June 2022. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Georgia described the case as involving conspiracy to defraud community banks, tax offenses and other counts; Julie was also convicted of obstruction. The office said the scheme involved more than $30 million in fraudulent loans. The original sentence for Julie was seven years in prison followed by three years of supervised release.
Recommended Free Tools
How is the reported malpractice lawsuit related?
The couple’s reported 2026 malpractice lawsuit is a separate civil case, not part of the resentencing. The Associated Press reported that they sued former defense counsel and the law firm Balch & Bingham, alleging legal malpractice, including inexperience and a conflict connected to a food-truck investment. Those claims are allegations in the complaint, not findings by a court. The defendants’ attorney said the case would be vigorously defended. The cited AP report does not establish the lawsuit’s later status.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
