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.
Which specific felony convictions or indictments involving Trump are under appeal and in which courts?
Executive summary
As of the most recent coverage in the provided sources, the central active appeal effort involving Donald Trump is his challenge to the 34-count New York state felony conviction for falsifying business records tied to hush-money payments; his lawyers have filed appeals in New York state appellate court and are pressing related federal court remedies after a 2nd U.S. Circuit panel ordered reconsideration of whether the case belongs in federal court [1] [2] [3]. Other matters noted in the results — civil appeals, federal-administration litigation, and unrelated appellate fights over policy — are distinct from criminal indictments and convictions and are being litigated in various federal appeals courts or state appellate tribunals [4] [5] [6].
1. The New York hush‑money criminal conviction: what’s on appeal and where
Trump’s principal criminal-appeal activity reported in these sources targets his May 2024 conviction on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in Manhattan; his legal team has filed a direct appeal in New York’s state appellate process seeking reversal of the verdict and also separately asked federal courts to examine whether the case should be moved to federal court in light of the Supreme Court’s presidential‑immunity decision [1] [3] [2]. A three‑judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered a U.S. district judge to reconsider whether the New York case belongs in federal court — reviving the possibility that federal judges could adjudicate immunity questions — while Trump concurrently pursues a state‑court appeal in the Appellate Division, First Department [2] [7].
2. What legal theories are driving the hush‑money appeals
Trump’s briefs argue the trial was “fatally marred” because evidence and testimony about his official acts as president were admitted after the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling, and his team asserts that those rulings require vacating the conviction or moving the case so a federal judge can apply presidential‑immunity precedent [1] [8]. The 2nd Circuit’s limited procedural ruling required lower courts to more fully consider those immunity questions; the panel did not itself reverse the conviction but remanded for further consideration [2] [7].
3. Where the appeal sits procedurally and what the courts have done so far
Procedurally, there are two tracks in the coverage: (A) a direct state‑court appeal filed in New York’s intermediate appellate court seeking reversal of the criminal conviction (Appellate Division, First Department) [3], and (B) a federal procedural avenue in which the 2nd Circuit ordered a district judge to reconsider Trump’s bid to remove or transfer the case to federal court to allow immunity arguments to be resolved there [2] [7]. The 2nd Circuit panel expressly “express[ed] no view” on the ultimate merits while keeping the federal‑court route alive [7].
4. Other appellate items in the coverage — civil and administrative, not criminal indictments
The provided results include appeals and appellate litigation involving Trump or his administration that are not criminal indictments: for example, New York Attorney General Letitia James appealed an appellate decision that had voided a large civil fraud penalty and asked the state’s highest court to reverse [5]; a separate federal appeals matter involved an attempt to revive a racketeering-style civil suit against political opponents and related sanctions proceedings in the 11th Circuit [4]. These are civil or administrative appeals and are distinct from the criminal appeals over the hush‑money conviction [5] [4].
5. What is not in the provided reporting
Available sources do not mention other specific criminal indictments or convictions currently on appeal beyond the New York hush‑money conviction and the procedural federal‑court fight over presidential immunity; for instance, the coverage here does not provide contemporaneous appellate-status details for Georgia, federal classified‑documents, or Jan. 6‑related matters in these search results (p1_s7 notes Georgia context but the specific appellate posture beyond disqualification and prosecutorial changes is not detailed in the other items). If you want the appellate status of other individual criminal cases, current reporting beyond these sources is needed because it is not described in the provided items [9].
6. Competing perspectives and political context
Trump’s team frames the appeals as correcting constitutional errors and protecting presidential immunity, describing the trial as “politically charged” [8] [1]. Prosecutors and other outlets emphasize that the 2nd Circuit’s order was procedural — sending the question back for consideration rather than overturning the conviction — and that the state‑court appeal remains the primary direct route to challenge the verdict [2] [7]. Different outlets highlight different implications: some portray the appeals court action as a major procedural victory, others as a narrow rebuke of district‑court process without an endorsement of immunity claims [10] [11].
If you’d like, I can compile a timeline of filings and court dockets for the New York state and federal matters referenced here (using only these sources), or search for appellate updates in other jurisdictions (Georgia, federal cases) not fully covered in the current set.