new York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan is set to decide Tuesday whether to overturn the president-elect’s conviction, which stemmed from a jury finding him guilty of falsifying business records to conceal a hush money payment to a porn star. Trump disputed the allegations in New York state court, but was found guilty by a 12-member jury.

Legal experts said the conviction could result in up to four years in prison, in addition to financial penalties. But given Trump’s return to the White House in less than 80 days and his preparations to lead the country for the next four years, experts say Trump can only expect a fine, if not a complete dismissal of the case, before his sentencing scheduled for November 26. .

Sentencing was supposed to take place in September before Merchan postponed it in light of defense attorneys citing a July 1 Supreme Court ruling granting former presidents some immunity from official acts. Even though the high court’s ruling applied primarily to Trump’s two separate federal cases, defense attorneys nonetheless said it should extend to the hush money case.

Alan Dershowitz, professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, told the Washington Examiner that “it is certainly possible that the conviction will not take place.”

“This shouldn’t happen,” said Dershowitz, a veteran appellate lawyer who has handled hundreds of high-profile celebrity cases, including as Trump’s lawyer during his first impeachment.

“I don’t understand the arguments against Trump in New York. If I had a criminal law class and were asked to describe Donald Trump’s conviction, I couldn’t do it. And so if you can’t even describe it or understand it, it’s just not a crime here. I think the only real impact of New York business was probably a small contribution to the election of Trump,” Dershowitz said.

Merchan delayed sentencing until after Tuesday’s election to review the immunity ruling and determine whether sentencing should proceed, “if necessary.” If sentencing is a possibility, Merchan wonders whether Trump should return to court at the end of this month or whether sentencing should be delayed until after his Jan. 20 inauguration.

The Supreme Court in Trump v. United States found that former presidents enjoy some level of immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts. The ruling stems from an appeal in the 2020 election subversion case brought by federal prosecutors, but Trump sought to use it as precedent for dismissing the hush money case in court. New York State.

If Merchan ruled in favor of Trump, either overturning his conviction based on the Supreme Court’s decision or delaying sentencing, it would eliminate one of the four criminal cases that had hung over him like a cloud as he continued his bid for re-election.

Although legal experts suggest a full prison sentence is highly unlikely, Trump could face sanctions including fines or probation. Some provide for a fine if the sentence is pronounced before the inauguration, although the timing remains uncertain.

Meanwhile, the Ministry of Justice examines how to handle two federal cases against Trump led by a special counsel Jack Smithin accordance with long-standing policy of not prosecuting sitting presidents. Accusations at the state level in Georgia related to alleged attempts to overturn the 2020 election remain unresolved.

Trump, 78, has pleaded not guilty in all four cases, describing them as politically motivated efforts to obstruct his campaign. He would be 82 when he completes his second presidential term, and some experts have even indicated that Trump’s age and lack of criminal record could be factors in sentencing after a New York jury found him guilty in May.

The jury found him guilty he was indicted on all 34 counts with in connection with the falsification of business records to conceal cash payments made to porn star Stormy Daniels in the final days of his 2016 campaign, making him the first ex-US president to become a convicted felon. Trump has denied allegations of an affair with Daniels and denounced Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case as a “witch hunt.”

Trump spokesman Steve Cheung said last Friday that the conviction should not stand, saying: “It is now abundantly clear that Americans want an immediate end to the militarization of our justice system, so that we can, as President Trump said in his historic victory speech, unify our country and work together for the betterment of our nation.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

The president-elect’s lawyers argue that the Manhattan case should be thrown out because the Supreme Court’s July ruling on presidential immunity bars evidence of official acts in lawsuits focused on personal conduct. The defense team says the jury saw evidence, including social media posts and testimony from former aides, linked to his presidency.

However, prosecutors in Bragg’s office say Trump’s actions were personal and not protected by presidential immunity.