The judge's ruling is a victory for America's most famous businesswoman because it means that Stewart would face substantially less prison time even if she were convicted of any of the four remaining charges against her.
And, in the unsettling world of life in the cross-hairs of a federal indictment, that is not a bad position for Stewart, whose case is scheduled to go next week to a federal jury in Manhattan.
"This is a great victory for her at this point," said James D. Cox, a professor at Duke University School of Law who specializes in securities law.
"It's highly significant because the greatest sentencing power was going to be on that charge," said Robert J. Cleary, the former U.S. attorney in New Jersey who is now a securities and criminal defense lawyer in New York.
Cleary said the judge's ruling was about the best Stewart and her defense lawyers could realistically hope for at this very difficult juncture of her case.
"The sentencing exposure, as a practical matter, has been cut to a fraction," Cleary said. "That's got to make them feel really, really good about this."
Stewart's indictment, which generated headlines around the world last June, provided perhaps the most dramatic signal to date of the new era of post-Enron regulatory scrutiny of corporate America.
Cox said Stewart became the big name used by the government, in the aftermath of Enron, to send that message to boardrooms across the country. "This case had marquis status," he said.
Stewart, meanwhile, remains charged with one count each of conspiracy and obstruction of justice and two counts of making false statements to federal investigators about her sale of ImClone stock in late 2001.
