Prosecutors oppose Trump’s attempt to delay post-conviction decisions in hush money case

In a letter to the trial judge, Juan M. Merchan, the Manhattan district attorney’s office argued that the judge is not legally required to delay post-trial decisions after Trump asked the US District Court in Manhattan to assume control of the case from the state court where it was tried.

Prosecutors urged Judge Merchan to proceed with rulings on two critical defence motions: Trump’s request to postpone sentencing until after the November election and his effort to overturn the verdict, following the US Supreme Court’s presidential immunity ruling.

Trump was found guilty in May on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to conceal a $130,000 hush money payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels, whose allegations of an affair threatened to disrupt his 2016 presidential campaign. Trump has denied the allegations and insisted he did nothing wrong.

In a letter, Assistant District Attorney Matthew Colangelo clarified that prosecutors have not taken a stance on delaying Donald Trump’s sentencing, leaving the decision to Judge Merchan on setting a suitable post-trial timeline.

Trump’s lawyers argue that proceeding with sentencing as scheduled, just two days after the expected ruling on the immunity motion, would not provide adequate time to explore next steps, including a possible appeal.

They also contended that sentencing Trump on 18 September, just weeks before Election Day, would amount to election interference, suggesting that Trump could be jailed as early voting begins, as reported by AP.

Assistant District Attorney Matthew Colangelo suggested that prosecutors are open to a timeline that allows sufficient time to address Trump’s motion to overturn the verdict while ensuring sentencing isn’t excessively delayed.

Trump’s lawyers argue that delaying proceedings is necessary, citing alleged constitutional rights violations and presidential immunity issues.

They claim prosecutors rushed to trial without waiting for the Supreme Court’s ruling, leading to potentially inadmissible evidence.

If the case moves to federal court, Trump’s team plans to seek a verdict overturn and dismissal on immunity grounds. Although a federal court initially rejected Trump’s request due to technicalities, his lawyers intend to refile it.

(with inputs from AP)