Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What were the specific charges in Trump's 34 felony conviction?
Executive summary
Donald Trump was convicted on 34 felony counts — each count charging him with falsifying business records in the first degree — tied to payments and related entries used to conceal a $130,000 hush‑money payment and reimbursements connected to Stormy Daniels and related transactions [1] [2]. Prosecutors said the falsified entries were intended to hide an effort to influence the 2016 election, which elevated the charges from misdemeanors to felonies; defense teams argue that characterization and other procedural issues are grounds for appeal [3] [4].
1. What the 34 counts specifically were: falsifying business records
Every one of the 34 counts charged the same statutory offense: falsifying business records in the first degree under New York law, with each count tied to a discrete business document or entry that prosecutors say was false or fraudulent — checks, invoices, or entries recording legal expenses or retainer fees — related to reimbursements for payments connected to Stormy Daniels and similar transactions [1] [2]. News outlets and the Manhattan DA’s office summarize that the 34 alleged false entries ranged across documents dated in 2017 that purported to record legal expenses when prosecutors say the underlying payments were actually hush‑money [1] [5].
2. Why prosecutors treated them as felonies, not misdemeanors
Falsifying a business record is ordinarily a misdemeanor in New York, but prosecutors elevated the charges to felonies by alleging that the falsified records were created to conceal another crime — specifically an unlawful scheme to influence the 2016 election by suppressing negative information about the defendant — which satisfies the “first degree” felony enhancement [3] [1]. The Manhattan DA framed the alleged scheme as an effort to “corrupt the 2016 election,” saying the false entries concealed the hush payment and thereby sought to keep damaging information from voters [2].
3. The factual pattern prosecutors relied on
Prosecutors presented evidence they say showed a trail of 34 documents tied to reimbursements and bookkeeping in 2017 after a $130,000 payment to adult film actor Stormy Daniels; they introduced checks, invoices, bank records, communications, and witness testimony to link the entries to the payment and to an intention to conceal it [2] [6]. Coverage notes the total cash and related costs reached figures cited by reporting (the reimbursement trail and book entries are central to each count) and that jurors were shown those 34 distinct entries [1] [6].
4. Defense arguments and the appeal challenge the theory behind the counts
Trump’s lawyers argue the DA’s approach was novel and legally flawed, contending jurors were permitted to convict without agreeing on which “unlawful means” were at issue and that prosecutors improperly expanded ordinary falsifying‑records counts into a politically charged election‑corruption theory [4] [3]. The formal appeal filed argues the trial was “fatally marred,” asserting evidentiary and legal errors and that the prosecution relied on an “elaborate theory” to turn bookkeeping mistakes into felonies [4] [3].
5. Sentencing outcome and practical impact on punishment
Although a jury convicted him on all 34 counts, reporting shows the judge ultimately imposed an “unconditional discharge,” meaning the convictions stand but the sentence did not include jail time, fines, or probation; that outcome has prompted discussion about the legal meaning and political consequences of being a convicted felon without further punishment [7] [8]. The DA’s office issued statements characterizing the verdict as proof of a scheme to conceal information from voters [2].
6. Broader context and competing perspectives
Mainstream outlets (AP, Reuters, BBC, NYT) consistently describe the counts as 34 felony falsifying‑business‑records charges linked to hush‑money payments and an alleged plan to affect the 2016 election, while defense filings and Trump’s lawyers characterize the prosecution as politically motivated and legally overreaching [5] [9] [10] [4]. Some experts flagged the legal novelty of elevating falsified business records to felonies via an election‑interference theory, a point the defense presses on appeal [3] [4]. Available sources do not mention any additional, different criminal statutes being adjudicated in those 34 counts beyond falsifying business records in the first degree (not found in current reporting).
Limitations: this summary uses only the provided reporting; it does not attempt to resolve ongoing appellate arguments or legal disputes about the correctness of the felony theory beyond reporting of positions taken by prosecutors and defense counsel [3] [4].