One year ago today, the jury consisting of 12 New York residents punished Donald Trump for falsifying business records as part of the alleged money scheme to influence the 2016 election.
That belief left an unlighted sign of Trump – making him the first president or former president who was found guilty of crime – and his struggle to erase the inheritance continued to this day.
On June 11, the Federal Appeals Court in Manhattan will hear an oral argument in the new legal struggle that was renewed to move its criminal cases from the state to the federal court.
District Attorney Manhattan Alvin Bragg opposed the move – on the grounds that a case could not be moved to a federal court after a sentence – but Trump’s lawyer argued “Criminal Prosecution that has never happened before for the former and former President of the United States who is currently in the Federal Court.”
Trump was found guilty of 34 accusations of crime after the prosecutor accused that he was involved in a “scheme” to increase his opportunities during the 2016 presidential election through a series of payment of silence money to the adult film actress Stormy Daniels and the forgery of New York’s business records to cover the alleged criminal acts.
“I did my job, and we did our work,” Bragg said following Trump’s belief. “There are many votes out there, but the only important voice is the sound of the jury, and the jury has spoken.”
Ten days before Trump was appointed president last November, New York Judge Juan Merchan punished him to get out without conditions – without prison, fine or probation – saying it was “the only legal sentence” to prevent “violating the highest limits on the land.”
State Judge of New York Juan Merchan punished the elected president Donald Trump when he appeared remotely with his lawyer Todd Blanche for a sentence as a prosecutor Joshua Steinglass listened to the New York Criminal Court in New York City, January 10, 2025.
Jane Rosenberg/Reuters
“I won an election in a large landslide, and people in this country understood what happened. This is a government weaponry,” Trump told the court during his sentence.
Trump continued to deny his mistakes, and his lawyer argued that his beliefs rely on evidence and testimony related to his official actions as president, including social media posts from his official Twitter account as president and testimony from the former Director of Communication Hope Hope Hicks.
The trial took place one month before the Supreme Court submitted an important decision that expanded the scope of the president’s immunity, and Trump’s lawyer argued that evidence would not be permitted based on the Decision of the High Court.
Trump’s lawyer tried to use the argument to throw the case before January Trump’s sentence, but the argument was rejected by judge Juan Merchan, two New York Appeal Courts, and the Supreme Court.
“Alleged violations of proof at the trial of the president-election-state-country-country Trump can be handled in an ordinary course compared to,” said the Supreme Court in a short opinion that was not signed, although four judges said they would give Trump applications.
For Trump’s criminal defense, he relied on lawyers who were defending Todd Blanche and Emil Bove, who now serves as Deputy Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General Associate. Earlier this week, Trump announced that he planned to nominate Bove – who led the cleaning of career law enforcement officials before the senate confirmed his nomination to help run the DOJ – to the United States appeal court for the 3rd circuit.
With his former defense lawyer now working for the government, Trump earlier this year knocked on the elite law firm Manhattan Sullivan & Cromwell to handle the criminal appeal.
Lawyers with the Department of Justice also submitted Brief Amicus in this week’s case to argue that the case must be tried – and discarded – by a federal court because the jury’s beliefs rely on evidence covered by the immunity.
“That the defense of President Trump actually took the form of a new constitutional immunity announced by the Supreme Court after his trial ended, rather than the new law imposed by the Congress, it must be if there was something that benefits the President,” Lawyer with the Department of Justice debates briefly on Tuesday.
Appeal-and ongoing attraction from Trump’s assessment worth $ 83 million in civilian cases E. Jean Carroll and cases of half-billions of civilian fraud are processed with legal reasons that have not been mapped when Trump holds presidency in his defense. He has characterized a prosecutor who pursues cases of him as a political motivation, and has heralded the victory of the election last November as political liberation.
“The actual decision will be November 5 by people,” Trump told reporters when he left the court after his sentence last year. “And they know what is happening here, and everyone knows what is happening here.”