The sentencing hearing for former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman and former HealthSouth CEO Richard Scrushy began Tuesday morning, with the proceeding expected to last for as long as four days.

Before the hearing began, Scrushy, his family and several ministers prayed in a parking lot across the street from the Frank M. Johnson federal courthouse, and both defendants again proclaimed their innocence to the charges. Police had to separate and disperse protestors in front of the courthouse after a shouting match erupted among them.

Almost one year ago, a federal jury in Montgomery found Scrushy and Siegelman guilty on charges of bribery, conspiracy and mail fraud. Siegelman was convicted also on an additional charge of obstruction of justice. According to prosecutors, Scrushy arranged a total $500,000 to pay down debt on Siegelman’s failed 1999 lottery campaign. Siegelman had personally secured the debt and would have had to pay the money himself had not someone else done so. In exchange, Siegelman appointed Scrushy to the Certificate of Needs board, a state agency that regulates hospitals and healthcare providers.

The sentencing follows a year of bizarre post-trial and pre-sentencing issues, as the defendants have accused jurors of improper communications before deliberations, requested the judge recuse himself because of a conflict of interest and accused state and national Republicans of trapping the defendants in a political conspiracy orchestrated by Karl Rove.

Prosecutors have asked that Scrushy and Siegelman be given 25 and 30 years in prison, respectively. Conversely, defense attorneys have asked that they be given probation. U.S. District Judge will split the difference when he pronounces a sentence later this week.

Also, Judge Fuller must determine whether to allow the defendants out on bond or to jail them after sentencing. Prosecutors have subpoenaed at least one witness, Scrushy’s yacht captain, and they are expected to argue the defendants should be taken into custody immediately after the sentence is handed down.

Tuesday morning, the attorneys argued how the defendants should fall on the federal sentencing guidelines, a complex and convoluted formula used for meting out punishments in federal criminal cases. The guidelines are only advisory for judges but they can be useful when contesting a sentence on appeal.

This morning, defense attorneys have argued that offenses on which the defendants were acquitted should not be considered when deciding the sentence. The law allows for judges to consider acquitted charges if they are relevant to the convictions and if the judge deems a preponderance of the evidence at trial supported the charges.

Check back for regular updates.

— Kyle Whitmire