Manhattan DA Proposes Non-Prison Sentence for Trump in Hush Money Case

 Manhattan DA Argues Against Dismissing Trump Case, Suggests Non-Prison Sentence as Alternative

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg urged a New York judge to reject former President Donald Trump’s motion to dismiss his criminal conviction in the hush money case, suggesting instead that sentencing could be delayed until Trump leaves office or that a non-incarceratory sentence could be imposed.

In a court filing unsealed Tuesday, Bragg pushed back against Trump’s claims of presidential immunity and his request to have the jury’s guilty verdict dismissed entirely. Trump was convicted in May on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records tied to a hush money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels during the 2016 presidential election.

"The People acknowledge the importance of an orderly executive transition and the peaceful transfer of power, but those interests do not require the extraordinary step of abating post-trial motion practice in a pre-existing criminal case," the filing stated.

Bragg emphasized that Judge Juan Merchan is not obligated to impose a prison sentence, citing Trump’s lack of prior criminal history and the nature of the Class E felonies. The DA suggested the court could issue an unconditional discharge—effectively releasing Trump without conditions at sentencing—or impose a non-incarceratory sentence, limiting the impact on Trump’s presidential duties.

Bragg argued that dismissing the case entirely would set a dangerous precedent. "Defendant's sweeping argument disregards the careful limits that the Supreme Court and the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) have placed on presidential immunity," he wrote.

The filing also criticized Trump’s legal team for rehashing arguments already rejected by the court and overreaching in their interpretation of presidential immunity. “There are no grounds for such relief now, prior to defendant's inauguration, because President-elect immunity does not exist," Bragg stated. "And even after the inauguration, defendant's temporary immunity as the sitting President will still not justify the extreme remedy of discarding the jury's unanimous guilty verdict."

Prosecutors proposed either postponing sentencing until Trump leaves office or concluding the case with a note that the jury’s verdict remains intact. The DA’s filing underscored the public interest in preserving the jury’s unanimous decision and upholding the rule of law.

This motion follows Trump’s recent legal victories, including the dismissal of his federal election interference case and his removal from an appeal in the classified documents case due to Justice Department policies protecting sitting presidents from prosecution.