Trending

Trump hush money sentencing delayed

Donald Trump in court
Trump hush money trial FILE PHOTO: Former U.S. President Donald Trump attends his criminal trial at Manhattan Criminal Court on May 29, 2024 in New York City. (Photo by Doug Mills-Pool/Getty Images) (Pool/Getty Images)

The judge overseeing President-elect Donald Trump’s hush money case has delayed Trump’s sentencing indefinitely.

Judge Juan Merchan adjourned Trump’s sentencing which had been scheduled for Nov. 26, CNN reported. The judge also granted Trump’s legal team’s request to file a motion to dismiss, giving them a deadline of Dec. 2 with the prosecution having till Dec. 9 to respond.

The arguments will focus on if proceedings would interfere with Trump’s transition to his second term, The Washington Post reported.

“Just as a sitting President is completely immune from any criminal process, so too is President Trump as President-elect,” Trump’s lawyers said in a filing.

Trump was convicted earlier this year on 34 counts related to money paid to porn actress Stormy Daniels. The payment happened before the 2016 election to keep Daniels quiet about an alleged sexual encounter that she had with the reality television personality-turned-politician.

Trump pleaded not guilty and said the payments he had made to his former attorney Michael Cohen, who paid Daniels, were for legal work, The Associated Press reported.

Earlier this week the prosecution said they were not opposed to delaying the sentencing but would oppose the conviction’s dismissal.

Merchan also said he would not decide on claims of presidential immunity until after he reviews the motion to dismiss and the prosecution’s response.

Earlier this year the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Trump did have some legal immunity when it came to official duties of office.

His lawyers said the jury received some improper evidence, including his presidential financial disclosure form, testimony from White House aides and social media posts made while he was the sitting president.

Prosecutors said that only a small portion of evidence could be considered under the Supreme Court ruling. The case, according to prosecutors, focused on personal conduct, Reuters reported.



0