Left: Donald Trump speaks after voting in the Florida primary election in Palm Beach, Fla., Tuesday, March 19, 2024 (AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee). Right: New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan poses for a picture in his chambers in New York, Thursday, March 14, 2024 (AP Photo/Seth Wenig).
The judge presiding over Donald Trump‘s criminal hush-money case has denied a motion from the president-elect to postpone Friday’s sentencing hearing.
New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan issued the order late on Monday, calling Trump’s motion “for the most part, a repetition of the arguments he has raised numerous times in the past.”
Early Monday, Trump had asked Merchan to halt the Jan. 10 sentencing while he appeals the court’s decision to uphold his conviction on 34 felony charges for falsifying business records.
Trump also used the opportunity to malign Merchan and prosecutors in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office for bringing the charges against him in the first place while arguing that the appeal should trigger an immediate halt of the case at the trial level.
“As discussed herein, the commencement of appellate proceedings — which should result in a dismissal of this politically-motivated prosecution that was flawed from the very beginning, centered around the wrongful actions and false claims of a disgraced, disbarred serial-liar former attorney, violated President Trump’s due process rights, and had no merit — seeking interlocutory review of these claims of Presidential immunity immediately results in an automatic stay of proceedings in this Court,” the document states. “Due to the fact that further criminal proceedings are automatically stayed by operation of federal constitutional law, the Court will lack authority to proceed with sentencing, must therefore immediately vacate the sentencing hearing scheduled for January 10, 2025, and suspend all proceedings in the case until the conclusion of President Trump’s appeal on Presidential immunity.”
Trump requested that Merchan rule on his request to stay the proceedings within a few hours, asking the court to notify the parties of his decision by 2 p.m. on Monday.
Hours after filing the stay, Trump’s attorneys filed a notice of appeal, arguing that Merchan’s ruling that immunity does not extend to the president-elect was erroneous and should be reversed.
“Justice Merchan’s erroneous decisions threaten the institution of the Presidency and run squarely against established precedent disallowing any criminal process against a President-Elect, as well as prohibiting the use of evidence of a President’s official acts against him in a criminal proceeding,” the appeal stated.
The Manhattan DA’s Office, for their part, opposed Trump’s motion to delay sentencing, arguing in a motion Monday afternoon that “Contrary to defendant’s claim, the mere fact that he has invoked presidential immunity in an interlocutory appeal does not entitle him to an automatic stay of further trial proceedings pending appeal.”
Prosecutors also informed Merchan of their belief that Trump was unlikely to win his appeal.
Merchan in his denial appeared to be unmoved by Trump’s arguments.
“This Court finds that the authorities relied upon in the motion by the Defendant are for the most part, factually distinguishable from the actual record or legally inapplicable,” Merchan wrote.
Merchan on Friday issued an 18-page order refusing to vacate the case against Trump but signaled that the former and soon-to-be president is not likely not face any real legal consequences and granted Trump’s request to appear virtually for the hearing.
“While this Court as a matter of law must not make any determination on sentencing prior to giving the parties and Defendant an opportunity to be heard, it seems proper at this juncture to make known the Court’s inclination to not impose any sentence of incarceration, a sentence authorized by the conviction but one the People concede they no longer view as a practicable recommendation,” the order reads.
The judge went on to muse that the “most viable solution to ensure finality” and allow Trump to exhaust his appellate rights is by sentencing him to “unconditional discharge.” This form of sentence equates to no further consequences and is typically used when a judge determines there is no practical import to imposing any legal disability on a convicted criminal defendant.
Law&Crime’s Jerry Lambe contributed to this report.
