Actor Pleads Guilty to Felony in College Admissions Scandal

BOSTON — The actress Felicity Huffman stood facing the judge, looking somber and subdued, in a gray dress and gray sweater. She wanted to make a few things clear, she said. Her daughter was not involved in the scheme to cheat on the SAT. And neither was a neuropsychologist who had treated her daughter since she was 8 years old. The responsibility, Huffman seemed to say, should only fall on her.

“I just didn’t want — I’m sorry, your honor,” she said, her voice breaking. “I just didn’t want to create the impression that the neuropsychologist had any part in this.”

Huffman, one of the best known faces among the 50 celebrities, business executives, sports coaches and others who have been charged in the nation’s largest-ever college admissions prosecution, pleaded guilty Monday to a single count of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud, acknowledging that she paid $15,000 to arrange for cheating on her daughter’s SAT test.

The cheating had occurred after Huffman’s daughter left the testing facility, when a proctor corrected her answers. And while prosecutors have suggested that some parents called on psychologists to deem their children in need of extra testing time in order to facilitate the cheating, Huffman said her daughter had been legitimately granted extra time on tests for years.

But Huffman’s comments to the judge, aiming to remove any taint from her daughter and the neuropsychologist, left unanswered questions that have lingered in the case: What role had Huffman’s husband, the actor William H. Macy, played in the events? And why did prosecutors choose not to charge him?

It is uncertain what penalty Huffman will face when she is sentenced in September. The conspiracy charge carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison. However, prosecutors have said that they would recommend four months behind bars for Huffman. They also have said that they would recommend a fine of $20,000 and 12 months of supervised release.

Federal sentencing guidelines are advisory, and judges may impose sentences that are heavier or lighter than an advised range.

Huffman, who grew emotional during the hearing, is one of about 20 parents, coaches and others who have pleaded guilty or said that they intend to in the far-reaching scheme that was coordinated by William Singer, a college counselor hired by scores of parents who hoped to get their children into elite colleges.

Prosecutors have said that extra testing time — permitted with guidance from a psychologist — made it easier for Singer to arrange the cheating by bribing certain test administrators. Yet, in Huffman’s case, Eric S. Rosen, the lead prosecutor, told the judge that the government was not asserting that extra time had been inappropriately awarded to her daughter.

“We have been working with a neuropsychologist since my daughter was 8 years old and she began receiving extra time on tests since she was 11,” Huffman said, after asking U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani whether she could clarify a few points.

Talwani asked what else she wanted to clarify.

“I think — ” Huffman began, before her voice gave out and she had to stop for a moment. “I’m sorry — I think you covered it.” She said that she wasn’t knowledgeable about all the details Rosen had mentioned during the hearing, involving the amounts of money Singer had paid the test administrator and proctor involved in the cheating.

“But everything else that Mr. Rosen said, I did,” she said.

Huffman and another parent charged in the case, Devin Sloane, pleaded guilty to the same felony count during a joint court hearing Monday afternoon. Sloane was charged with agreeing to pay Singer $250,000 so that his son would be recruited to the men’s water polo team at the University of Southern California, ensuring his admission, even though his son did not actually play the sport. Falsifying sports qualifications was another element of the admissions scheme Singer arranged, along with cheating on tests, prosecutors say.

An element of the case that remained unanswered after the hearing was Macy’s role in what happened. Macy has not been charged in the case. But references in the prosecution’s criminal complaint suggest that Macy — identified in the complaint as “her spouse” or “Spouse” — was not only aware of the plans, but a participant in at least some of them. Singer told law enforcement agents that he met with Huffman and Macy at their home in Los Angeles and “explained, in substance, how the college entrance exam scheme worked,” the complaint said. Singer said he told Huffman and Macy that he “controlled” a testing center, and “could arrange for a third party to purport to proctor their daughter’s SAT and secretly correct her answers afterward,” the complaint said, adding that Singer told investigators that Huffman and Macy agreed to the plan.

The complaint said that, in exchange for Singer’s arranging the cheating on their older daughter’s SAT, Macy and Huffman paid $15,000 to a fraudulent charity run by Singer. In a phone conversation recorded by investigators, Macy was on the line along with Huffman and Singer when plans — in the end, never carried out — were discussed for falsifying the SAT scores of their younger daughter as well.

“Are we all OK with the financial side and the actual operational side of it?” Mr. Singer asked Macy and Huffman in that phone call.

“Cool,” Macy responded.

A representative for the couple did not respond to a request for comment.

A spokeswoman for the U.S. attorney for the district of Massachusetts declined to comment on why Macy had not been charged, saying the investigation was continuing.

Rebecca Roiphe, a former prosecutor and a professor at New York Law School, said it was difficult to tell exactly why prosecutors would have chosen to charge only Huffman.

“The bottom line on Macy was that he seemed to have been less involved in the conduct,” she said. “There is no doubt that the conduct could have been charged, but prosecutors use their discretion all the time, and decide not to charge somebody because they consider it either unfair or not worth the resources.”

Not being charged does not absolve Macy, Roiphe added. “By not indicting people, the prosecutor is not sending the message, ‘What we think you did is OK.’” Bradley D. Simon, a former assistant U.S. attorney who prosecuted white-collar criminal cases, said he found it puzzling that prosecutors opted not to charge Macy, given the claims outlined in the complaint.

“Prosecutors have discretion as to who they charge,” Simon said. “It may be that he cooperated with federal agents and provided important information as to the involvement of others, although most likely not his wife. He also could get charged in the future.”

Macy does not appear to have suffered damage to his career. He is currently appearing in “Shameless,” a series on Showtime.

Huffman, on the other hand, has seen her career affected. Netflix said it would delay plans to release “Otherhood,” a comedy about motherhood starring Huffman. Huffman also deleted her parenting blog, “What the Flicka,” where she had publicly shared motherly angst.

Since charges were announced in the admissions scandal in March, Huffman has kept a low profile, announcing weeks ago that she intended to plead guilty and issuing a written apology to her family, her friends and her daughter.

“This transgression toward her and the public I will carry for the rest of my life,” Huffman said in the apology.