Trump s New York criminal case may be the first to go to trial, facing a critical test

Mondo Social Updated on 2024-02-08

The first of four criminal cases against Donald Trump that is expected to go to trial next week faces a major test, when a New York judge will rule on the Republican ex-** bid because the case is partisan and not protected by state law.

Trump, the frontrunner for the 2024 Republican nomination, is scheduled to go on trial in a Manhattan state court on March 25 on charges of falsifying business records to cover up hush money payments made to stars before 2016.

On Feb. 15, Juan Merchan will rule on Trump's motion to dismiss 34 charges. Trump pleaded not guilty and argued that the case should be dismissed because it was for partisan purposes and that state laws do not apply to federal elections.

According to Melcan's decision, the case could become the first criminal trial Trump faces before the Nov. 5 election rematch with Democratic Joe Biden (Joe Biden).

A federal judge in Washington last week postponed Trump's trial on charges of trying to overturn the 2020** results. The trial is scheduled to begin on 4 March.

Trump is seeking to dismiss the case, arguing that official acts he took during his tenure could be exempted from prosecution. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected that argument on Tuesday, but Trump said through a spokesman that he planned to appeal.

The trial in Florida's federal criminal case is scheduled for May, accusing Trump of mishandling ** documents, but it may be postponed. No trial date has been set for his Georgia case, which seeks to overturn his efforts to defeat Biden in 2020**.

Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Prosecutions charge cover-ups.

The Manhattan case focuses on the payment of $130,000 to star Stormy Daniels by former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen to prevent her from publicly claiming that she had sexual encounters with Trump in 2006, when he was married. Trump has denied it.

Cohen pleaded guilty in 2018 to violating federal campaign finance laws.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg said in April 2023 when he charged Trump that his New York-based family real estate company had erroneously recorded the payments that Trump had repaid to Cohen as a lawful retainer.

Prosecutors say it violates state law prohibiting falsifying business records to cover up another offense. In this case, they say the money violated federal campaign finance laws and was part of a plan to promote candidacy through "illegal means," in violation of state law.

Some critics say the case is less serious than the others Trump has faced because it has to do with his private life before taking office, rather than as an action taken to influence the election or more

In a radio interview last December, Bragg described the case from the perspective of electoral integrity.

It's about conspiring to sabotage the election and then lying about it in New York's business records to cover it up — that's the heart of the case," Bragg said in an interview with the WNYC's "The Brian Lehrer Show."

Trump claims "selective prosecution."

In seeking his dismissal, Trump's lawyer wrote that he had been the target of a "selective prosecution" by Democrat Bragg. Anyone else who committed similar behavior would be prosecuted, Bragg's office said, noting that Cohen pleaded guilty.

Trump's lawyers also argued that state attorneys could not use Trump's alleged concealment of violations of federal election law to justify false record allegations, and that state election laws do not apply to federal candidates.

Prague's office said business record forgery laws are not limited to cases involving state-level crimes, and state election laws apply to federal election campaigns.

A judge has already ruled against Trump on similar grounds.

U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein, in denying Trump to take the case to federal court last year, said New York election laws did not distinguish between state and federal elections and that the falsification of business records law did not exempt federal elections.

Anna Cominsky, a professor at New York Law School, said prosecutors appeared to have stronger arguments because business record laws are not limited to covering up state crimes.

It's very extensive," Kominsky said. "This is not to say that the prosecutor has to prove that other crimes were committed, but only that there was such an intention.

Related Pages