New York’s intermediate appeals court should overturn President Donald Trump’s criminal hush money convictions because his trial was “fatally marred” by flawed evidence and was overseen by a judge who should have recused himself, his lawyers argued in a court filing late Monday.
Trump’s formal appeal, 17 months after a Manhattan jury found him guilty of 34 felonies, asks the First Department of the Appellate Division to reverse what his lawyers call “the most serious decision.” politically charged process in the history of our nation.
Trump was convicted in May 2024 after a six-week trial for what prosecutors called a scheme to conceal a $130,000 payment his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels to prevent her from talking about a long-denied affair before the 2016 presidential election. Trump repaid Cohen in monthly installments that prosecutors said amounted to falsified records.
“The district attorney, a Democrat, brought these charges in the middle of a contentious presidential election in which President Trump was the leading Republican candidate. These charges against President Trump were as unprecedented as their political context,” said Trump’s lawyers at the white-shoe law firm Sullivan. & Cromwell wrote in his appeal.
Under New York State law, falsifying business records becomes a felony if the records were falsified to commit or conceal another crime. The appeal accused Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg of trying to “twist New York law” to persuade the jury that Trump violated election statutes.
“Targeting alleged conduct that has never been found to violate any New York law, the DA fabricated an alleged felony by stacking prescribed misdemeanors under a convoluted legal theory, which the DA then improperly concealed until the charging conference. This case should never have reached the inside of a courtroom, much less resulted in a conviction,” the appeal argued.
President Donald Trump delivers a speech at the US ambassador’s residence in Tokyo, Japan, on October 28, 2025.
Andrew Harnik/Getty Images
Relying on a Supreme Court decision made after the trial that limited the use of evidence related to a president’s “official acts,” Trump’s lawyers also argued that New York Judge Juan Merchán was wrong to allow evidence protected by presidential immunity. According to Trump’s lawyers, the jury inadequately considered testimony from Trump’s former communications director Hope Hicks, later described by prosecutors as “devastating” to Trump, as well as evidence taken from his Twitter account and other protected conversations.
“The trial was fatally marred by the introduction of official presidential acts that the Supreme Court has made clear cannot be used as evidence against a president,” the appeal said.
The appeal also took aim at Judge Merchan, arguing that a $15 donation he made to President Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign and another $20 in donations to Democratic-aligned organizations demonstrated political bias.
Before the trial, the New York State Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee concluded that those donations, as well as Merchan’s daughter’s work for a digital advertising agency that worked with Democratic officials, did not create a conflict for Merchan.
Following Trump’s conviction, Merchan, on the eve of Trump’s inauguration, sentenced him to a unconditional download — the lightest possible punishment allowed under New York state law — saying it was the “only legal sentence” to avoid “invading the highest office in the land.”
