.png){kind=icon}
Administrator- Joined
- May 11, 2013
- Posts
- 24,882
- Reaction score
- 13,611
- Points
- 2,755
- Location
- Morganton, N.C.
- Website
- conversations-ii.freeforums.net
(The Guardian) Manhattan DA's office says it will not oppose Trump request to delay hush-money sentencing
The Manhattan district attorney’s office has said it will not oppose a request by Donald Trump’s lawyers to file a motion arguing that his conviction should be set aside, following Monday’s supreme court immunity ruling.
In a letter addressed to the New York judge presiding over Trump’s hush-money trial, Juan Merchan, prosecutors said they received a request from the former president to postpone the sentencing hearing, which is scheduled for 11 July, while Merchan weighs how Monday’s court ruling affects the case.
Prosecutors wrote: Although we believe the defendant’s arguments to be without merit, we do not oppose his request for leave to file and putative request to adjourn sentencing pending determination of his motion.
It is now up to judge Juan Merchan to determine whether to grant Donald Trump’s request to postpone his hush-money sentencing, after Manhattan prosecutors said they would not oppose delaying the 11 July sentencing date.
The former president’s request came after the supreme court’s ruling on Monday granting him broad immunity from prosecution. According to the decision, Trump cannot be held criminally liable for many acts taken when he was president.
In a letter to Merchan, Trump’s legal team asked him to postpone the sentencing hearing while he weighs how the court ruling affects the case.
Although the offences happened before Trump was president, his lawyers argue that the supreme court ruling confirms their argument that some evidence should be inadmissible because it related to presidential acts. “The trial result cannot stand,” lawyers Todd Blanche and Emil Bove wrote.
Donald Trump’s request to set aside his hush-money conviction is probably just the first real-world impact of Monday’s controversial ruling from the supreme court.
The decision by the conservative-dominated court, which ruled that former presidents are entitled to some degree of immunity from criminal prosecution, was seen as a major victory for the presumptive Republican nominee.
The court found 6-3 that presidents were protected from prosecution for official actions that extended to the “outer perimeter” of his office, but could face charges for unofficial conduct.
Although the offences in Trump’s hush-money trial happened before Trump was president, his lawyers argue that the supreme court ruling confirms their argument that some evidence should be inadmissible because it related to presidential acts.
The supreme court’s decision will also likely eviscerate numerous parts of the criminal prosecution against Trump over his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
The Manhattan district attorney’s office has said it will not oppose a request by Donald Trump’s lawyers to file a motion arguing that his conviction should be set aside, following Monday’s supreme court immunity ruling.
In a letter addressed to the New York judge presiding over Trump’s hush-money trial, Juan Merchan, prosecutors said they received a request from the former president to postpone the sentencing hearing, which is scheduled for 11 July, while Merchan weighs how Monday’s court ruling affects the case.
Prosecutors wrote: Although we believe the defendant’s arguments to be without merit, we do not oppose his request for leave to file and putative request to adjourn sentencing pending determination of his motion.
It is now up to judge Juan Merchan to determine whether to grant Donald Trump’s request to postpone his hush-money sentencing, after Manhattan prosecutors said they would not oppose delaying the 11 July sentencing date.
The former president’s request came after the supreme court’s ruling on Monday granting him broad immunity from prosecution. According to the decision, Trump cannot be held criminally liable for many acts taken when he was president.
In a letter to Merchan, Trump’s legal team asked him to postpone the sentencing hearing while he weighs how the court ruling affects the case.
Although the offences happened before Trump was president, his lawyers argue that the supreme court ruling confirms their argument that some evidence should be inadmissible because it related to presidential acts. “The trial result cannot stand,” lawyers Todd Blanche and Emil Bove wrote.
Donald Trump’s request to set aside his hush-money conviction is probably just the first real-world impact of Monday’s controversial ruling from the supreme court.
The decision by the conservative-dominated court, which ruled that former presidents are entitled to some degree of immunity from criminal prosecution, was seen as a major victory for the presumptive Republican nominee.
The court found 6-3 that presidents were protected from prosecution for official actions that extended to the “outer perimeter” of his office, but could face charges for unofficial conduct.
Although the offences in Trump’s hush-money trial happened before Trump was president, his lawyers argue that the supreme court ruling confirms their argument that some evidence should be inadmissible because it related to presidential acts.
The supreme court’s decision will also likely eviscerate numerous parts of the criminal prosecution against Trump over his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
