What are trumps 34 counts

Checked on January 23, 2026
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news. Learn more.

Executive summary

The 34 counts are state felony charges that accused Donald J. Trump of falsifying New York business records in the first degree as part of an alleged scheme to conceal a $130,000 hush‑money payment tied to the 2016 campaign; the indictment lists 34 separate false entries in Trump Organization records that prosecutors say masked the payment and related reimbursements [1] [2]. A Manhattan jury found Trump guilty on all 34 counts in May 2024, a verdict that prosecutors framed as an effort to hide damaging information from voters and that defense lawyers portrayed as politically motivated [3] [4].

1. What the statute charged — falsifying business records in the first degree

Each of the 34 counts charged a violation of New York’s falsifying business records statute elevated to a first‑degree felony because prosecutors alleged the records were falsified with intent to commit or conceal another crime — turning what might otherwise be misdemeanors into felonies under state law [1] [2].

2. The factual core: entries, checks and reimbursement scheme

The indictment alleges that 34 false entries were made in Trump Organization records to conceal an initial covert $130,000 payment and subsequent reimbursements; prosecutors say checks were processed and described as legal expenses under a sham retainer when, they contend, no legitimate legal retainer existed [1] [2].

3. Why prosecutors say the charges mattered to the election

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg argued the falsified entries were not isolated bookkeeping errors but part of a scheme to hide damaging information from voters ahead of the 2016 presidential election — a theory prosecutors used to explain why the falsifications were tied to an alleged underlying crime and thus merited felony treatment [1] [4].

4. The verdict and its rarity — first conviction of a former president

A jury in Manhattan convicted Trump on all 34 counts on May 30, 2024, making this the first time a former U.S. president was criminally convicted; the conviction applied to each of the individual falsified‑record counts as laid out in the indictment [3] [5] [6].

5. Defense position and competing narratives

Trump’s legal team consistently denied wrongdoing, characterizing the prosecution as politically motivated and invoking arguments about presidential immunity and selective enforcement — a narrative the defense used to rally supporters and challenge the legitimacy of the case even after conviction [7] [5].

6. Where the 34 counts fit in the broader legal picture

Those 34 New York counts were part of multiple prosecutions involving Trump between 2023–2025; across federal and state actions he faced many other charges in separate cases, but it was the 34 Bronx/Manhattan falsified‑records counts that resulted in the guilty verdict recorded in May 2024 [8] [9].

7. What the counts actually look like on paper

The indictment, publicly released and preserved in document repositories, lists discrete entries and transactions tied to the hush‑money payment and labels for each allegedly false business record; readers can review the charging instrument to see the specific dates, amounts and descriptions the prosecution attributes to each of the 34 counts [2].

8. Open questions, appeals and political implications

Although convicted on the 34 counts, the case spawned immediate appeals and political backlash; supporters pressed for dismissal or reversal while opponents pointed to the verdict as a legal reckoning — the reporting and court filings show both legal avenues (appeals) and political uses of the outcome by proponents and critics alike [7] [4].

Want to dive deeper?
What exactly did the New York indictment list for each of the 34 falsified‑records counts (dates and descriptions)?
How have Trump's appeals challenged the legal theory that falsifying business records can be elevated to a felony when tied to other alleged crimes?
How did media outlets of different political leanings cover the 34‑count verdict and subsequent legal developments?