What criminal charges has Donald Trump faced in federal and state courts and what are the key allegations in each case?
Executive summary
Donald Trump has faced four high‑profile criminal prosecutions since 2023: two federal cases (one over classified White House documents alleging 40 counts of willful retention and obstruction, one over alleged efforts to obstruct the 2020 election with four counts), a New York state case in Manhattan that produced a conviction on 34 counts of first‑degree falsifying business records related to hush‑money payments, and a Georgia state indictment linked to efforts to overturn the 2020 result that originally alleged up to 13 counts (later reduced to eight). The federal cases were dismissed after his 2024 election victory; the New York conviction led to an unconditional discharge in January 2025, and the Georgia case was paused and later subject to disqualification proceedings against the prosecutor [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. Federal documents case — "willful retention" and obstruction in Florida
Prosecutors in the Southern District of Florida charged Trump in June 2023 with a set of counts that, in a superseding indictment, totaled 40 charges alleging mishandling of classified national defense information and related obstruction of the government’s efforts to recover those materials — described in reporting as 40 criminal charges alleging mishandling of sensitive documents and conspiracy to obstruct retrieval [1]. That prosecution was later dismissed after Trump won the 2024 presidential election; Special Counsel Jack Smith asked to dismiss without prejudice, leaving open the possibility of refiling, and courts and commentators have noted statute‑of‑limitations and other legal questions if refiled [5] [1].
2. Federal election obstruction case — alleged conspiracy to overturn 2020 result (D.C.)
A separate federal indictment in the District of Columbia charged Trump with four counts tied to attempts to overturn the 2020 election, including conspiracy to defraud the United States and obstruction of an official proceeding (the Jan. 6 proceeding). That D.C. prosecution was brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith, but Judge Tanya Chutkan approved Smith’s motion to dismiss the case after Trump’s 2024 victory, again without prejudice — meaning prosecutors argued the DOJ policy against indicting a sitting president required dismissal, while Smith’s report later said the admissible evidence could have sustained a conviction [6] [2] [5].
3. New York state case — falsifying business records tied to hush‑money (Manhattan)
The People of the State of New York charged Trump in Manhattan; the long‑running trial began April 15, 2024, and a jury found him guilty on 34 felony counts of first‑degree falsifying business records in connection with alleged hush‑money payments — the indictment was first unsealed in March 2023 [2] [3]. Judge Juan Merchan later sentenced Trump to an unconditional discharge on Jan. 10, 2025, meaning no prison, probation or fines were imposed; Trump’s lawyers sought to vacate the conviction after the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity ruling, but the judge denied that motion in mid‑December before the discharge [2] [4].
4. Georgia state case — alleged conspiracy to subvert Georgia’s 2020 result
In August 2023 Fulton County prosecutors indicted Trump and 18 co‑defendants on state charges tied to efforts to overturn Joe Biden’s victory in Georgia; Trump originally faced as many as 13 counts, later reduced to eight, alleging wrongdoing in a multi‑defendant conspiracy to alter the election outcome [1]. The case was paused while Georgia courts considered disqualification petitions against District Attorney Fani Willis; the Georgia Court of Appeals disqualified Willis in December 2024 and state appeals processes continued into 2025 [1].
5. Outcomes, procedural posture, and remaining uncertainties
By early 2025 the federal prosecutions had been dismissed after Trump returned to the presidency, though Special Counsel Smith’s reports contended the admissible evidence could have supported convictions and asked that dismissals be without prejudice so charges could be refiled after he left office; commentators and reporting note uncertainty about statutes of limitations and the practical difficulty of refiling [5] [6]. The New York conviction stands in the record but resulted in an unconditional discharge; the Georgia case’s trajectory has been shaped by challenges to the prosecutor’s authority and remains legally contested [2] [1] [4].
6. Competing narratives and hidden incentives
Prosecutors across jurisdictions argued the charges were supported by documentary evidence and witness testimony; Trump and his allies framed the prosecutions as politically motivated and sought dismissal based on presidential immunity and other defenses — courts have split on procedural questions such as immunity and the proper timing of prosecutions for a former or sitting president [6] [4]. Observers also note institutional incentives: Special Counsel Smith sought to preserve the option to refile, while Trump’s political resurgence changed prosecutorial calculus and produced dismissals that critics say reflect DOJ policy rather than adjudication on the merits [5] [7].
Limitations: available sources in this packet do not provide full charging instruments or all evidentiary claims in each indictment; for granular counts, dates, and quoted statutory language consult the original indictments and court dockets referenced in the cited reporting [1] [2] [4].