A New York judge was asked by prosecutors from the Manhattan district attorney’s office to uphold President-elect Donald Trump’s felony conviction in his hush money case. They made a number of recommendations for how the case should proceed without interfering with his executive duties.

In the filing released on Tuesday, they suggested that the judge should reassure Trump that he will not be imprisoned, since this could allay his “concerns” while he is in office. However, they contended that there was no justification for dismissing the case or overturning the May ruling.

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 claim that due to immunity, the indictment on felony criminal charges and his subsequent jury conviction ought to be overturned.

Last month, Judge Juan Merchan 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.”

The DA’s office also noted that Trump has already said he’d appeal any sentence and that 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.

Many of the defendant’s worries, according to the filing, are related to the prospect of “potential incarceration.” 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.”

That type of “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,” the filing said.

The DA’s office also presented a novel alternative, suggesting Merchan could use a mechanism known as abatement that is practiced in Alabama and some other states when defendants die before sentencing.

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. This essentially “abates the criminal proceedings without vacating the underlying conviction or dismissing the indictment.”

Although abatement isn’t used in New York, prosecutors argued it presents a solution in which, as here, there are concerns about finality and punishment.

It’s unclear when Merchan will rule on the motions to dismiss.

Trump was convicted in May on34 counts of falsifying business recordsrelated to a hush money payment his then-lawyer Michael Cohen made to adult film star Stormy Daniels in the closing days of the 2016 election.

Daniels claims she had a sexual encounter with Trump in 2006, which he denies.

In their court filings, Trump’s attorneys said the DA should follow the lead of special counsel Jack Smith, who moved todismiss his two federal criminal casesagainst Trump after he won the election.

The prosecutors’ filing noted there are significant differences between their case and Smith’s cases, including that Smith’s cases hadn’t gone to trial.

Cheung, the spokesperson for Trump, stated, “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!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *