Imposition Of Sentence

Mr. Trump, you appear before this court today to conclude this criminal proceeding by the imposition of sentence.  Although I have taken the unusual step of informing you in advance of my inclinations before imposing sentence, I believe it is important for you as well as those observing these proceedings to understand my reasoning for the sentence I am about to impose.

[N]ever before has this court been presented with such a unique and remarkable set of circumstances.  Indeed, it can be viewed fairly that this has been a truly extraordinary case.  There was unprecedented media attention, public interest, and heightened security involving various agencies.  And yet, the trial was a bit of a paradox, because once the courtroom doors were closed, the trial itself was no more special, unique or extraordinary than the other 32 criminal trials that took place in this courthouse at the same exact time.

To be clear, the protections afforded to the office of the president are not a mitigating factor.  They do not reduce the seriousness of the crime or justify its commission in any way.  The protections are, however, a legal mandate which, pursuant to the rule of law, this court must respect and follow.  However, despite the extraordinary breadth of those protections, one power they do not provide is a power to erase a jury verdict.

After careful analysis in obedience to governing mandates and pursuant to the rule of law, this court has determined that the only lawful sentence that permits entry of a judgment of conviction without encroaching upon the highest office in the land is an unconditional discharge, which the New York State Legislature has determined is a lawful and permissible sentence for the crime of falsifying business records in the first degree.

Therefore, at this time I impose that sentence to cover all 34 counts.

-- New York State Judge Juan Merchan, at the sentencing hearing for president-elect Donald Trump (10 January 2025)