In a judicial document released on Tuesday (2nd), the sentencing date for Donald Trump in his bribery case involving an adult film actress has been postponed to September 18. Originally, the sentencing was scheduled for July 11, just days before the start of the Republican National Convention on July 15.
Trump is expected to be the Republican party’s nominee to challenge Democratic President Joe Biden in the November 5 election. The former president faces an uphill battle to overturn his conviction, as much of the conduct for which he is accused predates his time in the White House.
On Monday (1st), Trump’s attorneys requested that Judge Juan Merchan allow them to argue that his conviction should be annulled due to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision that presidents are entitled to immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts.
Members of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office stated that Trump’s argument was “without merit” but agreed to postpone the sentencing to give the former president a chance to present his case.
Merchan noted in writing that he would decide on Trump’s request by September 6, with sentencing to follow less than two weeks later, should the jury uphold the conviction.
Trump’s attorneys must submit their arguments by July 10, and prosecutors have until July 24 to respond.
Case Background
On May 30, a Manhattan jury in New York found Donald Trump guilty of falsifying business records to cover up a $130,000 payment made by his former lawyer Michael Cohen to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. The payment was allegedly intended to silence Daniels until after the 2016 election about an alleged sexual encounter with Trump in 2006.
In the 2016 presidential election, Trump defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton. Prosecutors argued that the payment was part of an illicit scheme to influence the election.
Trump denies having had sex with Daniels and has vowed to appeal the conviction following his sentencing.
Judge Previously Called Payment “Purely Personal”
In their letter to Merchan, Trump’s defense attorneys argued that prosecutors presented evidence involving Trump’s official acts as president, including social media posts he made and conversations he had while in the White House.
According to the U.S. Supreme Court decision, prosecutors cannot use evidence related to official actions to help prove charges in criminal cases involving “unofficial” actions.
“This evidence of official acts should never have been presented to the jury,” wrote attorneys Todd Blanche and Emil Bove.
Last year, Trump made a similar argument as part of an attempt to move the case to federal court.
In denying Trump’s request in July 2023, U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein wrote that the payment to Daniels “was a purely personal item.”
“Money paid to silence an adult film star is not related to a president’s official acts,” Hellerstein wrote.
Trump’s attorneys appealed Hellerstein’s decision but later abandoned that effort.
