A New York choose on Friday delayed Donald J. Trump’s prison trial in Manhattan till a minimum of mid-April, suspending the one one among Mr. Trump’s 4 prison instances that appeared set to start.
The delay — lasting 30 days from the choose’s Friday choice — stems from the current disclosure of greater than 100,000 pages of data which will have some bearing on the case. Citing the data, Mr. Trump’s attorneys sought a 90-day delay of the trial, whereas the Manhattan prosecutors that introduced the case proposed a postponement of as much as 30 days.
The prosecutors from the Manhattan district lawyer’s workplace, who accused the previous president of overlaying up a intercourse scandal throughout and after his 2016 marketing campaign, had stated the additional time would enable Mr. Trump’s attorneys to overview the data that just lately emerged.
Mr. Trump, who just lately clinched the Republican presidential nomination for the third time, was initially set to go on trial on March 25. Now, the choose within the case, Juan M. Merchan, will maintain a listening to that day to find out whether or not the trial ought to be delayed additional — and in that case, for the way lengthy.
“There are important questions of truth which this Courtroom should resolve,” the choose wrote.
He additionally ordered each side to provide a “detailed timeline of the occasions” main as much as the current disclosure of the data.
During the last two weeks, Mr. Trump’s attorneys and the district lawyer, Alvin L. Bragg, obtained the tens of 1000’s of pages of paperwork from federal prosecutors, who in 2018 investigated a hush-money cost on the middle of the case in opposition to Mr. Trump. It’s unclear whether or not any of the data include new proof, or different info related to the case.
That is simply the most recent delay within the former president’s many authorized entanglements. Mr. Trump, who faces 4 prison trials and several other civil lawsuits, has succeeded in stalling most of the instances.
A prison case in opposition to Mr. Trump in Washington, the place he’s accused of plotting to overturn the 2020 election outcomes, was initially speculated to go to trial this month, however that’s delayed whereas Mr. Trump appeals to the Supreme Courtroom.
The federal case in Florida charging Mr. Trump with mishandling categorized paperwork was initially set for Could, however now doesn’t have a trial date.
And a choose in Atlanta this week quashed six of the fees in opposition to Mr. Trump in his Georgia election interference case, which additionally lacks a trial date.
Till now, the Manhattan case had been the one one of many 4 prison instances not mired in delays as Justice Merchan pushed the case forward at each flip.
The last-minute arrival of the data appeared to lift some rigidity between Mr. Bragg and his federal counterparts.
Mr. Bragg’s prosecutors had requested data final yr from the federal prosecutors within the Southern District of New York, and obtained some, however not all of what they sought.
Then, in January, Mr. Trump’s attorneys subpoenaed the Southern District, which in the end turned over 73,000 pages of data to each the protection and the prosecution earlier this month. “The overwhelming majority” of these data are irrelevant to the case, Mr. Bragg’s prosecutors stated in a submitting on Friday.
However this week, they stated, the Southern District dropped one other 31,000 paperwork in response to Mr. Trump’s subpoena, and a “subset” of these data is related. Mr. Bragg’s prosecutors added that that they had beforehand sought some — they didn’t say what number of — of those self same data from the Southern District final yr.
It’s unclear why the Southern District didn’t beforehand present that materials to Mr. Bragg, a detailed regulation enforcement companion. A spokesman for the Southern District, which was anticipated to show over a ultimate batch of 15,000 data on Friday, declined to remark.
In a court docket submitting on Thursday, Mr. Bragg stated his prosecutors had been ready to start the trial on March 25 as deliberate, however that they didn’t oppose a 30-day delay “out of an abundance of warning and to make sure that defendant has ample time to overview the brand new supplies.”
