NEW YORK (Reuters) -New York’s top court rejected on Thursday U.S. President-elect Donald Trump’s request to halt his sentencing for his conviction on criminal charges stemming from hush money paid to a porn star, court papers showed.
The decision is a setback for Trump, who now must pin his hopes of freezing the case on the U.S. Supreme Court, where his lawyers have made a similar emergency bid to avoid the sentencing, set for Friday in a New York state court in Manhattan court.
Manhattan prosecutors responded at the Supreme Court to that on Thursday morning, opposing Trump’s bid for a stay.
Trump has asked for proceedings in the criminal case to stop as he seeks an appeal to resolve questions of presidential immunity following a Supreme Court ruling last July that granted former presidents broad immunity from criminal prosecution for their official acts.
In the 19-page letter, Wu wrote: “The particular immunity-based arguments that defendant has actually raised also do not support any automatic stay. And no discretionary stay of the January 10 sentencing is warranted either.”
The sentencing hearing is set for 10 days before Trump is due to be sworn in for his second term as president. Any substantial delay would likely mean Trump would not be sentenced before his Jan. 20 inauguration.
Trump was found guilty last May of 34 counts of falsifying business records to cover up a $130,000 payment to porn star Stormy Daniels in exchange for her silence before the 2016 U.S. election about a sexual encounter she has said she had with Trump a decade earlier, which he has denied. Prosecutors have said the payment was designed help Trump’s chances in the 2016 election, when he defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton.
Trump is the first former U.S. president to be criminally prosecuted and the first former president convicted of a crime.
Trump has denied any wrongdoing.
The trial judge in Trump’s case, Justice Juan Merchan, said last week he was not inclined to sentence the president-elect to prison and would likely grant him unconditional discharge. This would place a guilty judgment on Trump’s record, but would not impose custody, a fine or probation.
Trump’s lawyers have argued that the hush money case should be dismissed in light of the Supreme Court’s landmark July 1 ruling. They contend that prosecutors improperly admitted evidence of Trump’s official acts during the trial. They also argue that, as president-elect, Trump is immune from prosecution during the period between his November election victory and his inauguration.
(Reporting by Andrew Chung and Luc Cohen in New York and John Kruzel in Washington; Editing by Will Dunham)
Comments