Verdict if Corliss didn't testify SPOILERS

SPOILERS


Not sure if anyone else had wondered this, but say that the defense and prosecution both rested their case BEFORE Minton decided to bring Corliss to testify against Roulet, would the jury have returned a verdict of guilty or not guilty?? In other words, if Minton didn't call a "rebuttal witness" and rather they just went straight to closing arguments.

I would say Roulet would be found Not Guilty because with all evidence being heard at that point, the prosecution didn't concretely prove anything.

Also, for anyone with a background in law, if found guilty, what kind of sentence would Roulet have received by Judge Fullbright?

Thanks for your answers.