Have there been any convictions related to the fake electors plot?

1. A handful of guilty pleas, not a cascade of convictions

The reporting identifies specific guilty pleas: Jenna Ellis pleaded guilty in the Georgia racketeering prosecution in October 2023 to an offense tied to her participation in the fake‑electors scheme and cooperated with prosecutors ^[1], and in Arizona Loraine Pellegrino, one of 11 alleged fake electors, pled guilty to filing a false instrument ^[1]. These entries constitute the clearest, documented instances of convictions or plea‑based resolutions in the materials provided ^[1].

2. Many indictments; few completed trials

State prosecutors filed indictments across multiple states — Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada and Wisconsin among them — charging dozens of people who signed or helped craft phony electors’ certificates, and charging some campaign advisers as well ^{[4] [5] [2]}. Arizona’s grand jury indicted 18 people including 11 who signed the false Arizona certificate and several Trump aides, and that case moved toward a Jan. 5, 2026 trial date before facing procedural setbacks ^{[4] [3]}. Those indictments are largely at the pretrial stage in the sources provided ^{[2] [3]}.

3. Procedural detours and mixed state outcomes

Several prosecutions have been slowed, shifted, or dismissed: Nevada’s prosecution was dismissed by a judge, Georgia’s case experienced fits and starts, and courts in Arizona sent the case back to a grand jury over a prosecutorial disclosure issue — all signs that convictions are not inevitable even where charges exist ^{[2] [1]}. Reporters and analysts note that some defendants have sought federal jurisdiction or relied on legal defenses tied to the Electoral Count Act and other theories, complicating straightforward paths to conviction ^{[1] [2]}.

4. The national context: investigations, special counsel and political stakes

The fake‑electors scheme also figures prominently in federal probes — notably the Smith special counsel’s investigation — and in Fulton County and other state cases that overlap with broader charges about election subversion; Trump is identified as a central figure in some of those indictments and investigations even where he has not been criminally charged in each state matter ^{[6] [5]}. The politicized nature of the prosecutions is evident in competing narratives: prosecutors frame the acts as criminal fraud and election subversion ^{[4] [5]}, while many defendants and some political allies argue they acted in good faith under contested legal theories ^{[1] [2]}.

5. What the reporting does not (yet) show

The sources document a small number of pleas but do not provide a broad tally of completed felony convictions across all jurisdictions; many cases remain pending or were subject to dismissal or interlocutory rulings ^{[1] [2]}. Where reporting speculates about deterrent effects or broader political consequences, those are assessments rather than hard conviction data, and the available material does not support a claim of widespread, final convictions beyond the cited pleas ^{[4] [7]}.

6. Stakes and the near horizon

Several high‑profile trials were set to proceed in 2026 — most visibly Arizona’s Jan. 5 trial date — meaning the near term could produce additional resolutions, but the record to date in the supplied reporting is: some indictments, a few guilty pleas/convictions (notably Pellegrino and Ellis), and many contested cases still awaiting final adjudication ^{[3] [1] [2]}. Readers should treat counting convictions as a moving target because of ongoing proceedings, plea deals, dismissals and appeals described across the state prosecutions ^{[2] [1]}.