Donald Trump has been charged with breaking laws in four separate criminal cases: falsifying business records in New York, conspiring to overturn the 2020 election under federal law, illegally retaining classified documents under federal law, and racketeering under Georgia law. Only the New York case produced a conviction. By late 2025, the two federal cases and the Georgia case had all been dismissed, and the New York sentence carried no jail time, fine, or probation. The dismissals were based on procedural and constitutional grounds rather than findings of innocence, so the underlying statutes and allegations still matter for understanding what laws Trump was accused of breaking.
New York: Falsifying Business Records
The only case that reached a verdict was built on New York Penal Law § 175.10, which makes it a felony to falsify business records when the intent to defraud includes a plan to commit or conceal another crime.1New York State Senate. New York Penal Code 175.10 – Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree Without that added criminal intent, the same conduct is a misdemeanor. Prosecutors said the additional crime involved violations of state election law and tax regulations.
A Manhattan jury convicted Trump on all 34 felony counts in May 2024.2Manhattan District Attorney’s Office. D.A. Bragg Announces 34-Count Felony Trial Conviction of Donald J. Trump Each count corresponded to a specific document: checks, invoices, vouchers, and ledger entries that labeled reimbursement payments as legal fees. The entries concealed a $130,000 payment made to silence an individual before the 2016 election.
A Class E felony in New York carries a maximum of four years in prison per count.3New York State Senate. New York Penal Code 70.00 – Sentence of Imprisonment for Felony First-time offenders convicted under this statute rarely face incarceration, and judges have discretion to impose probation, fines, community service, or no penalty.
Sentence and Appeal
On January 10, 2025, Judge Juan Merchan sentenced Trump to an unconditional discharge on all 34 counts. The felony conviction remains on his record, but there is no jail time, no fine, and no probation. The judge stated that an unconditional discharge was the only lawful sentence that would not encroach on the office of the presidency, since Trump had won the 2024 election and was days from inauguration.
Trump filed a formal appeal in October 2025, arguing the trial was fundamentally flawed, that jurors were allowed to consider evidence that should have been excluded, and that the judge made critical errors. The appeal is pending before the Appellate Division of New York’s Supreme Court. Until it is resolved, the conviction stands.
Federal Election Case: Three Statutes
Special Counsel Jack Smith secured a four-count federal indictment alleging Trump conspired to overturn the 2020 presidential election. The charges rested on three statutes.
The first was 18 U.S.C. § 371, which makes it a crime for two or more people to conspire to defraud the United States by interfering with government functions through dishonest means.4Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S.C. Chapter 19 – Conspiracy The government alleged that false claims of widespread voter fraud were used to pressure the Department of Justice. Maximum penalty: five years.
The second was 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2), which prohibits corruptly obstructing an official proceeding, together with § 1512(k), which extends the same penalties to anyone who conspires to do so.5Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S. Code 1512 – Tampering With a Witness, Victim, or an Informant Prosecutors tied this count to the January 6, 2021 disruption of the congressional certification of electoral votes. Maximum penalty: 20 years.
The third was 18 U.S.C. § 241, which makes it illegal for two or more people to conspire to deprive anyone of constitutional rights.6Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S. Code 241 – Conspiracy Against Rights The government argued that submitting fraudulent elector slates and attempting to discard legitimate votes effectively disenfranchised millions of voters. Maximum sentence: ten years when no death results.
After the Supreme Court’s immunity decision in July 2024, Smith filed a superseding indictment in August 2024 that kept the same four charges but stripped out allegations tied to official presidential conduct. The case never went to trial. After Trump won the 2024 election, Smith moved to dismiss on November 25, 2024, and Judge Tanya Chutkan granted the motion the same day. Smith cited longstanding Department of Justice policy that a sitting president cannot be criminally prosecuted.7U.S. Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel. A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution The dismissal was without prejudice, meaning the charges could theoretically be refiled after Trump leaves office.
Federal Classified Documents Case: Three Statutes
A separate federal indictment alleged Trump illegally retained national defense information after leaving the White House and then obstructed government efforts to recover it. The case involved three statutes.
The primary charge was 18 U.S.C. § 793(e), part of the Espionage Act, which prohibits willfully holding onto national defense information one is not authorized to possess and refusing to return it.8Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S. Code 793 – Gathering, Transmitting, or Losing Defense Information The government described highly classified documents stored in unsecured areas of a private club. Maximum penalty: ten years.
The obstruction charge used 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(2)(B), which targets anyone who corruptly persuades another person to hide or alter documents to keep them out of an official proceeding. Prosecutors alleged that boxes of documents were moved to avoid detection after a grand jury subpoena had been issued. Maximum penalty: 20 years.
A third set of charges invoked 18 U.S.C. § 1001, which makes it a crime to knowingly provide false information to the federal government.9Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S. Code 1001 – Statements or Entries Generally The government claimed Trump’s legal team told investigators all requested documents had been returned when many remained on the property. Maximum penalty: five years.
On July 15, 2024, Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the entire indictment, ruling that Smith’s appointment violated the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Smith appealed but withdrew the appeal after Trump won the 2024 election, and the dismissal became final in November 2024. No higher court reviewed Judge Cannon’s reasoning on the merits.
Georgia: Racketeering and Related Charges
Fulton County prosecutors used Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act to frame the post-election efforts as an organized criminal enterprise. The Georgia RICO statute, O.C.G.A. § 16-14-4, makes it illegal to participate in an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity.10Justia Law. Georgia Code 16-14-4 – Prohibited Activities The indictment named Trump and multiple co-defendants.
The indictment also included criminal solicitation under O.C.G.A. § 16-4-7, based on documented requests to state officials to alter vote totals or certification procedures.11Justia Law. Georgia Code 16-4-7 – Criminal Solicitation Additional counts alleged conspiracy to commit forgery and conspiracy to make false statements, centered on the creation of unofficial elector slates submitted to federal authorities as if they were legitimate.
A Georgia RICO conviction carries a mandatory minimum of five years and a maximum of twenty, plus potential fines up to $25,000 or three times the financial gain from the violation.12Justia Law. Georgia Code 16-14-5 – Criminal Penalties for Violation To prove RICO, the state must establish a pattern of racketeering activity, which under Georgia law requires at least two related predicate acts.
On November 26, 2025, Judge Scott McAfee dismissed the case in its entirety. The new lead prosecutor stated that the alleged criminal conduct was conceived in Washington, D.C., and that the federal government was the more appropriate venue. Georgia’s statute of limitations is four years for most felonies and five years for racketeering, so some charges may already be time-barred.
Why Most Cases Ended Without a Verdict
Two Supreme Court decisions in the summer of 2024 reshaped the federal cases. In Trump v. United States, decided July 1, 2024, the Court established three tiers of immunity from criminal prosecution for a former president: absolute immunity for actions within core constitutional powers, presumptive immunity for other official acts, and no immunity for unofficial acts.13Supreme Court of the United States. Trump v. United States That framework forced Smith to revise the federal election indictment and remove allegations tied to interactions with the Department of Justice.
Three days earlier, in Fischer v. United States, the Court narrowed 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2), holding that the government must prove the defendant impaired the availability or integrity of records, documents, or objects used in an official proceeding.14Supreme Court of the United States. Fischer v. United States Prosecutors can no longer use the statute as a catch-all for conduct that disrupts government business. That undermined a key charge in the election case.
The pardon power did not resolve any of these cases, but it set the outer limits. Article II of the Constitution gives the president the power to grant pardons only for offenses against the United States, meaning federal crimes.15Congress.gov. Overview of Pardon Power A president cannot pardon a state-level conviction, so the New York conviction and the Georgia charges were always beyond the reach of presidential clemency. The federal cases were resolved by dismissal rather than pardon.
DOJ policy that a sitting president cannot be indicted or criminally prosecuted was the explicit basis for dismissing the federal election case and a practical barrier in Georgia. The policy is not a statute or a constitutional rule and has never been tested in court, but because federal prosecutors follow it, the effect is the same.