What were the charges, evidence, and sentences in Trump’s convictions or indictments?

1. The New York ‘hush‑money’ case: charges, evidence and the outcome

Manhattan prosecutors indicted Trump on 34 counts of first‑degree falsifying business records, asserting the counts stemmed from reimbursements and bookkeeping entries used to conceal a $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels during the 2016 campaign and related conduct; prosecutors presented testimony and documentary evidence — including Michael Cohen’s cooperation and internal documents — to show a scheme to hide a purpose related to the election ^{[3] [8] [2]}. A jury found Trump guilty on all 34 counts on May 30, 2024, making him the first former president convicted of felony crimes; the judge denied later immunity challenges and on Jan. 10, 2025 sentenced Trump to an unconditional discharge, which leaves the conviction on his record but imposes no prison, fines, or probation ^{[3] [2] [8]}.

2. The federal election‑interference prosecutions led by Special Counsel Jack Smith

Special Counsel Jack Smith brought federal charges alleging a multi‑count scheme to obstruct the official proceeding of certifying the 2020 election and related conspiracies; his final report later argued the admissible evidence would have been sufficient to obtain convictions had the cases proceeded to trial ^{[4] [9]}. Those federal matters were effectively paused or dismissed after Trump’s 2024 electoral victory because Department of Justice policy and court rulings about presidential immunity narrowed the scope of prosecutable “official acts”; Smith closed and then sought dismissal “without prejudice,” saying the evidence supported prosecution but DOJ policy and legal hurdles prevented continuing during a presidency ^{[4] [9]}.

3. The Mar‑a‑Lago classified‑documents case and related federal proceedings

The Justice Department under Smith also pursued prosecution over alleged hoarding and mishandling of classified documents at Mar‑a‑Lago; those federal cases were similarly interrupted and then dropped or put on hold after Trump won the 2024 election, with Smith documenting the evidence in his final report but requesting dismissal consistent with DOJ policy about indicting a sitting president ^{[5] [4]}. Available sources do not detail final trial findings because the cases were not fully litigated to verdict before being dismissed or paused ^[4].

4. The Fulton County, Georgia RICO indictment: scope, evidentiary focus and what happened

Fulton County indicted Trump and 18 co‑defendants in August 2023 on 13 counts including Georgia’s anti‑racketeering (RICO) statute, alleging a coordinated effort to illegally overturn the state’s 2020 results, with evidence focused on phone calls, texts and meetings such as his call to Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger ^{[7] [6]}. The case was paused while appellate courts considered disqualifying prosecutor Fani Willis; Willis was removed by the Georgia Court of Appeals and the case was later taken over by a successor who dismissed the remaining charges—ending that prosecution ^{[10] [6] [7]}.

5. Sentences, real‑world effects and legal posture after 2025 developments

The only conviction returned at trial as reported in these sources was the 34‑count Manhattan verdict; though that conviction remained on record, Judge Merchan’s January 10, 2025 unconditional discharge meant no incarceration, fines, or probation ^{[2] [3]}. The federal cases were dismissed or shelved after the 2024 election and Smith’s resignation; the Georgia indictment was dropped after prosecutorial disqualifications and a successor’s filing ^{[4] [6]}. Sources document appeals and ongoing legal maneuvering seeking to overturn convictions or relitigate immunity questions ^{[11] [12]}.

Limitations and competing views: reporting by prosecutors (Jack Smith) asserts the evidence in federal files was sufficient for conviction, while Trump’s teams argue immunity and trial errors require dismissal—both positions appear in official filings and press coverage ^{[9] [11]}. Available sources do not describe every piece of trial evidence in detail nor do they provide final appellate resolutions on all claims; readers should expect further litigation and appeals beyond the time span in these reports ^{[5] [11]}.