New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg argued that Donald Trump‘s conviction in his hush money case should not be dismissed, while proposing sentencing alternatives as the former president prepares to return to office.
Trump and his legal team want the conviction tossed, citing a variety of factors including their claim that he is shielded by presidential immunity.
But in his filing to Judge Juan Merchan, Bragg wrote that “no principle of immunity precludes further proceedings before [Trump’s] inauguration. And even if judgment has not been entered at the time of defendant’s inauguration, there is no legal barrier to deferring sentencing until after defendant’s term of office concludes.” That would be in 2029.
“In either event, sentencing would serve the important purpose of deterring future crime,” Bragg wrote.
Bragg also wrote that the court could follow an “abatement by death” context to end the proceedings without vacating the jury’s verdict or dismissing the indictment.
He also wrote that limitations on future proceedings could address concerns about its potential interference in presidential decision-making. That includes assurances that Trump would not face incarceration.
Bragg wrote that “many of defendant’s concerns stem from the possibility that he will face “potential incarceration” here. Here, however, because defendant has no priorcriminal convictions and was convicted of Class E felonies, this Court is not required to impose asentence of incarceration at all, and could even impose an unconditional discharge. … The Court could therefore conclude that presidential immunity, while not requiring dismissal, nonetheless would require a non-incarceratory sentence in these circumstances. Such a constitutional 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.”
Trump was convicted in May of 34 felonies for falsifying business records related to the hush money payments made to former porn star Stormy Daniels. Merchan delayed Trump’s sentencing several times, and eventually put it on hold as the issue of whether to dismiss the conviction outright was argued by the prosecution and defense.
Bragg wrote that there “are no grounds” for dismissing the case now, “prior to defendant’s inauguration, because President-elect immunity does not exist. And even after the inauguration, defendant’s temporary immunity as the sitting President will still not justify the extreme remedy of discarding the jury’s unanimous guilty verdict and wiping out the already-completed phases of this criminal proceeding.”
