New York prosecutor files opposition to reversing Trump’s conviction

Trump’s lawyers have argued that jurors were improperly exposed to witness testimony and records that were generated in 2017, his first year in office, that were extensions of the former president’s official duties. Prosecutors said the nation’s highest court did not hand down any finding that should disturb the verdict or see the case dismissed.

“The Supreme Court’s recent ruling thus has nothing to say about defendant’s conviction," lawyers for Bragg’s office wrote. “But even if that decision required the exclusion of all of the evidence that defendant cites here, there would still need be no basis for disturbing the verdict because of the other overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt."

New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan delayed Trump’s sentencing more than two months until Sept. 18 to give defense lawyers time to formally argue that evidence used by Bragg’s trial team was not admissible under the immunity doctrine which prohibits prosecution based on a president’s official acts.

The U.S. Supreme Court issued its controversial ruling July 1. The court ruled 6-3 along ideological lines that a president can’t face prosecution for official acts or through the use of evidence related to official conduct. Private conduct is not covered by that protection.

With the new timeline, the Republican presidential nominee could receive a jail sentence less than two months before the November election. He could also get a non-jail sentence or a sentence that is stayed pending the outcome of his appeal.

If Merchan upholds the verdict, the matter could be locked up in appeals until well after the election. An appeals court could stay enforcement of Trump’s sentencing.

Defense lawyers have argued that a significant amount of the evidence used against Trump at trial was collected in the course of presidential actions and should have been excluded. The indictment should be dismissed altogether, they said, because the district attorney’s case has been intertwined with prohibited evidence since the case was presented to a grand jury last year.

Bragg’s reply to Trump’s motion said that “evidence that [Trump] claims is affected by the Supreme Court’s ruling constitutes only a sliver of the mountains of testimony and documentary proof that the jury considered in finding him guilty of all 34 felony charges beyond a reasonable doubt.”