‘The People are prepared to appear for sentencing on any future date the Court sets,’ prosecutors wrote to the judge.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office said it will defer to a New York judge regarding former President Donald Trump’s request to delay his criminal case sentencing until after the presidential election this year.
Bragg’s office, in a letter received by the court on Aug. 19, wrote that prosecutors will leave it up to Judge Juan Merchan to decide whether Trump’s sentencing in his New York case should be delayed beyond the current Sept. 18 hearing date.
Trump’s attorneys last week asked the judge to postpone his sentencing until after the November election because he is the leading Republican candidate for president. Prosecutors did not specifically oppose the former president’s request for a delay.
Prosecutors wrote in their letter: “Given the defense’s newly stated position, we defer to the Court on whether an adjournment is warranted to allow for orderly appellate litigation of that question, or to reduce the risk of a disruptive stay from an appellate court pending consideration of that question.
“The People are prepared to appear for sentencing on any future date the Court sets.”
In their request for a delay, Trump’s lawyers last week wrote to the judge that the sentencing should take place after the start of early voting for the election, saying the timing would harm the proceedings.
“Sentencing is currently scheduled to occur after the commencement of early voting in the Presidential election,” Trump attorney Todd Blanche wrote. “By adjourning the sentencing until after that election—which is of paramount importance to the entire Nation, including tens of millions of people who do not share the views of Authentic, its executives, and its clients—the Court would reduce, even if not eliminate, issues regarding the integrity of any future proceedings.”
They also argued there was not enough time before the sentencing for the defense to potentially appeal Merchan’s ruling on Trump’s request to overturn the conviction because of the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling on presidential immunity.
