ST. THOMAS – The sentencing of former Virgin Islands Police Commissioner Ray Martinez and former Office of Management and Budget Director Jenifer O’Neal is expected to take place six months from now, according to the federal judge presiding over the case.
U.S. District Judge Mark Kearney named June 10, 2026 as the likely sentencing date after 12 jurors found both defendants guilty on all counts on Thursday, including honest services wire fraud, bribery concerning programs receiving federal funds, and money laundering conspiracy. Martinez was also convicted of obstruction of justice.
Martinez and O’Neal join Calvert White, former Department of Sports, Parks, and Recreation commissioner, as the latest Virgin Islands public officials convicted in corruption cases involving David Whitaker, the former owner of Mon Ethos Pro Support and cooperating government witness who pleaded guilty to wire fraud and bribery last year.
Now convicted, the focus shifts to the impending sentencing of all three former government officials, but the question of what sentence each can expect is not easily answered.
Sentencing is a complex process in which federal judges calculate penalties under advisory guidelines issued by the United States Sentencing Commission. These guidelines provide a framework by weighing a number of different elements of the offense.
In these cases, which fall under the subsection for offenses involving government officials, the guidelines weigh factors such as the amount of the bribes, the type of authority held by the public official, and whether the conduct involved efforts to conceal the crimes. These guidelines measure a crime’s seriousness by “levels,” with higher levels corresponding to longer recommended prison terms.
Martinez is likely to face the harshest sentence, convicted on five counts of honest services wire fraud, one count of bribery concerning programs receiving federal funds, one count of money laundering conspiracy, and two counts of obstruction of justice.
Each of the offenses carries significant statutory penalties. Honest services wire fraud and money laundering convictions can each carry up to 20 years in prison per count, while bribery involving programs receiving federal funds carries a maximum of 10 years per count. Obstruction of justice, of which Martinez was also convicted, can carry up to 20 years per count.
While O’Neal is not contending with obstruction, her convictions on two counts of honest services wire fraud, one count of bribery concerning programs receiving federal funds,and one count of money laundering conspiracy still carry significant penalties.Her role as a senior official in a managerial role will also impact the sentencing calculation.
Given these offenses, Martinez and O’Neal could spend the rest of their lives in prison, but that is unlikely. In public corruption cases like this one, the sentencing guidelines often point toward concurrent sentences for closely related offenses, meaning the prison terms are served at the same time rather than back-to-back. In other words, a defendant sentenced to 15 years for wire fraud and 10 years for bribery would serve 15 years total, not 25.
White, who will be sentenced next month, was found guilty of wire fraud and bribery earlier this year for soliciting and accepting bribes from Whitaker to help him secure a contract with DSPR. At first glance, he may appear to face the most benign sentencing of the three former officials.But his convictions—one count of honest services wire fraud and one count of bribery concerning programs receiving federal funds— carry the same statutory maximums facing O’Neal and Martinez.
One of the factors weighed by the sentencing guidelines could even expose White to a harsher sentence than Martinez or O’Neal.
The sentencing guidelines consider the value of the benefit sought or obtained, not just the size of the bribe itself. In other words, while the bribe may have been for $16,000, White’s sentencing calculation will be based on the $1.6 million DSPR contract the bribe bought. The same applies for O’Neal and Martinez, whose convictions center around a $1.4 million contract between the Virgin Islands Police Department and Mon Ethos Pro Support.
Restitution, on the other hand, is based on the actual losses rather than the guideline calculations. And federal law governs whether it is required, depending on the statute. Wire fraud convictions require restitution,where as bribery and money laundering do not automatically.
Another factor considered in sentencing is the acceptance of responsibility, with a defendant who accepts responsibility able to receive a level reduction. Given that Martinez, O’Neal, and White each pleaded not guilty, and did not accept any plea deals that may have been offered, they will almost certainly not receive level reductions for acceptance of responsibility. In fact, Martinez is likely to receive level increases for the two obstruction of justice convictions.
Ultimately, the final decision rests with the court. The sentencing guidelines are just that— guidelines used by the judge to calculate an advisory sentencing range.They are not mandatory.
Martinez and O’Neal are currently out on the same conditions of release outlined in a January 10 order, but that will soon change for Martinez. Following the jury’s verdict on Thursday, Kearney ordered him to self-surrender before 2p.m.on February 17, 2026, at the Ron de Lugo Federal Building and U.S.Courthouse, at which point he is expected to be taken into custody to await sentencing.
Kearney determined that O’Neal, as a business owner and person well established in the community, was not likely to flee nor was she a danger to the community and allowed her to remain free until sentencing. However, Kearney did note that O’Neal would not be given the same leniency in traveling she had experienced under her pretrial release.
