A court in New York is being urged by prosecutors from the Manhattan district attorney’s office to uphold President-elect Donald Trump’s felony conviction in the hush money case. They are providing a number of recommendations on how the case should proceed without interfering with his presidential duties.
In the document released on Tuesday, they suggested that the court reassure Trump that he would not be imprisoned in the case, which may allay his “concerns” while he is in office. However, they contended that there is no justification for dismissing the case or overturning the May 2024 decision.
The prosecutors from DA Alvin Bragg’s office argued that dismissal is strongly discouraged by the overwhelming evidence of the defendant’s guilt and the vital need of maintaining public trust in the criminal justice system, among many other considerations.
Additionally, they criticized Trump’s assertion that the case ought to be “immediately” dismissed due to his preexisting presidential immunity.
“There is no such thing as president-elect immunity. Furthermore, the brief stated that the severe remedy of overturning the jury’s unanimous guilty decision and erasing the already finished stages of this criminal action would not be justified by the defendant’s temporary immunity as the current President, even after the inauguration.
“[N]o immunity concept prohibits additional procedures prior to the defendant’s inauguration. Additionally, it stated that there is no legal obstacle to postponing punishment until after the defendant’s term of office ends, even if a judgment has not been entered at the time of the defendant’s inauguration.
The filing, according to Trump spokeswoman Steven Cheung, is “a pathetic attempt to salvage the remains of an unconstitutional and politically motivated hoax.”
Since there is no discernible distinction between President Trump’s existing standing following his resounding victory in the national election and that of a sitting president after inauguration, Trump’s lawyers have contended that he already enjoys immunity. They argue that his subsequent jury conviction on felony criminal charges and the indictment against him should be overturned on the grounds of immunity.
Last month, Judge Juan Merchanin indefinitely delayed Trump’s punishment so that both parties could make their case.
“At most, defendant should receive temporary accommodations during his presidency to prevent this criminal case from meaningfully interfering with his official decision-making,” the district attorney’s office stated in the brief on Tuesday.
One of the options put out by the prosecution was deferring Trump’s sentence until after his term in office.
“The public does not contest that accommodations are necessary for presidential immunity while a president is in office. However, given several other concessions that would adequately address the issues brought up by presidential immunity, the drastic measure of dropping the charge and overturning the jury decision is not justified,” their filing stated.
A stay, they claimed, would release Trump “from any immediate obligations in this case during his time in office, while at the same time respecting the public interest in upholding the rule of law and preserving the meaningful aspects of the criminal process that have already taken place.”
Trump has already stated that he will appeal any sentence, according to the DA’s office, and in New York, “it is routine for appeals to be decided years after sentencing even without a formal stay of proceedings.”
Additionally, Trump’s sentencing has already been delayed for several months, according to the prosecution.
“Here, defendant can hardly complain about a delay in sentencing when he has affirmatively sought such delay both before and after his reelection,” the complaint stated.
According to prosecutors, the court may perhaps allay some of Trump’s concerns by refusing to give him a jail sentence.
According to the document, “many of the defendant’s concerns stem from the possibility that he will face ‘potential incarceration,'” among other things. “Here, however, because defendant has no prior criminal convictions and was convicted of Class E felonies, this Court is not required to impose a sentence of incarceration at all, and could even impose an unconditional discharge.”
Such a “limitation on the range of available sentences would further diminish any impact on defendant s presidential decision making without going so far as to discard the indictment and jury verdict altogether,” according to the lawsuit.
The DA also offered a fresh solution, recommending that Merchan employ the abatement mechanism, which is used in Alabama and several other states when a criminal passes away before to being sentenced.
According to the so-called “Alabama” rule, “when a defendant dies after he is found guilty, but before the conviction becomes final through the appellate process, the court places in the record of the case a notation to the effect that the conviction removed the presumption of innocence but was neither affirmed nor reversed on appeal because the defendant died,” according to the district attorney’s office, which essentially “abates the criminal proceedings without vacating the underlying conviction or dismissing the indictment.”
Prosecutors claimed that although though abatement is not currently used in New York, it offers a solution in situations like this one when finality and punishment are issues.
The judge’s decision regarding the motions to dismiss is still pending.
In May, Trump was found guilty on 34 charges of falsifying business records pertaining to the hush money payment made to adult film star Stormy Daniels by his former attorney, Michael Cohen, in the final days of the 2016 election.
Trump disputes Daniels’ allegation that she had a sexual encounter with him in 2006.
Trump’s lawyers stated in court documents that the DA ought to follow special counsel Jack Smith’s example, who asked to have his two federal criminal proceedings against Trump dismissed after he won the election.
According to the DA’s brief, there are important distinctions between their case and Smith’s, such as the fact that Smith’s cases were not tried.
Cheung continued, “This lawless case should have never been brought, and the Constitution demands that it be immediately dismissed, as President Trump must be allowed to continue the Presidential Transition process, and execute the vital duties of the presidency, unobstructed by the remains of this, or any other, Witch Hunt.”
Note: Every piece of content is rigorously reviewed by our team of experienced writers and editors to ensure its accuracy. Our writers use credible sources and adhere to strict fact-checking protocols to verify all claims and data before publication. If an error is identified, we promptly correct it and strive for transparency in all updates, feel free to reach out to us via email. We appreciate your trust and support!