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 34 felony counts in Donald Trump's New York conviction?
Executive summary
Donald J. Trump was convicted by a Manhattan jury in May 2024 on 34 felony counts — all charged as first‑degree falsifying business records — tied to efforts to conceal a $130,000 payment to adult‑film actor Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election (the counts stem from the so‑called “hush‑money” scheme) [1][2]. New York law treats falsifying business records as a felony when the falsification is done to commit or conceal another crime, which is the legal theory the Manhattan District Attorney used [3].
1. What the 34 felony counts actually were — falsifying business records in the first degree
Every count the jury returned guilty on was a charge of falsifying business records in the first degree — 34 separate counts tied to different entries or transactions in corporate or campaign‑adjacent records that prosecutors say were altered or misstated to hide the $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels [1][2]. The indictment and the court docket treated each misstatement or related entry as a distinct count, producing the total of 34 felony counts [4].
2. The underlying conduct the prosecution said the counts concealed — hush money to Stormy Daniels
Prosecutors framed the falsified records as part of a coordinated effort to conceal a payment to an adult‑film performer whose alleged encounter with Trump, if publicized during the 2016 campaign, might have affected the election. Reporting cites a $130,000 payment at the center of the prosecution’s case [1][5]. The factual focus in filings and courtroom testimony was on the payment and the surrounding bookkeeping, not on a broad racketeering or conspiracy indictment in New York [1].
3. Why these misdemeanors became felonies under New York law
By itself falsifying business records in New York is often a misdemeanor; it becomes a felony when prosecutors prove the falsification was done to commit or conceal another crime. The Manhattan DA argued the record‑keeping misstatements were intended to hide violations related to the payment scheme, elevating every count to first‑degree falsifying business records [3][2].
4. Defense arguments and challenges to the counts
Trump’s defense disputed the credibility of key witnesses and argued that the payments and bookkeeping were ordinary business or legal transactions or political activity, not elements of a crime; they also later raised that some evidence presented at trial involved official‑act material that could be protected by presidential immunity after a Supreme Court decision [6][5]. His legal team has repeatedly sought to overturn the conviction on those and related grounds in appellate filings [3][5][7].
5. How the conviction and sentence played out
A Manhattan jury found Trump guilty on all 34 counts on May 30, 2024 [6][8]. After post‑trial litigation and delays tied in part to questions about presidential immunity and timing, Judge Juan Merchan ultimately imposed an unconditional discharge on January 10, 2025 — the lightest disposition under New York law — meaning the convictions remain but no further penalties were imposed at sentencing [6][9][10].
6. Appellate posture and the immunity argument that challenges the counts
Trump’s team has appealed, arguing the trial was improperly permitted to include evidence of acts taken while he was president and that the Supreme Court’s immunity precedent requires reversal or dismissal — a central theme of filings and later appeals asking New York appellate courts (and in some procedural venues a federal court) to revisit the conviction [5][11][7]. Courts have at various times reviewed whether the immunity ruling affects admission of certain evidence and whether removal to federal court is warranted [6][11].
7. Limitations in the available reporting and what’s not claimed here
Available sources supplied here identify the 34 counts as first‑degree falsifying business records tied to concealing the hush‑money payment and describe the legal and appellate aftermath, but they do not list the language of each individual count line‑by‑line or attach the full indictment text in these excerpts; the precise phrasing of each count is in court filings and the indictment [4]. If you want the exact statutory language and count‑by‑count allegations, those are found in the formal indictment and court documents (not reproduced fully in the excerpts here) [4].
8. Competing perspectives and the political frame
Prosecutors and many news outlets characterized the counts as a criminal attempt to hide an election‑relevant payment [1][2]. Trump’s team and sympathetic outlets call the prosecution “politically charged” or a “witch hunt,” emphasizing weak evidence or immunity problems and pushing appellate relief [3][11][7]. Both frames are present in the reporting cited above; readers should note the legal distinction: the jury convicted on falsifying records, while appeals rely heavily on immunity and evidentiary challenges [1][5].
If you want, I can pull the specific indictment language for each of the 34 charged entries (the formal count descriptions) from the court docket so you can see the charge text tied to each count.