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.
Fact check: Which Trump convictions are currently under appeal in 2025?
Executive Summary
As of the sources provided (published between January and June 2025), two principal criminal matters involving Donald Trump were identified as having active appellate activity: an Eleventh Circuit criminal appeal docketed as United States v. Donald Trump (24-12311) and the New York criminal conviction for falsifying business records arising from the hush‑money case, which defendants planned to appeal. Other major matters, notably the D.C. Jan. 6 election‑subversion prosecution, were in active procedural transition but not characterized in these sources as an ongoing appellate conviction in 2025 [1] [2] [3].
1. A federal criminal appeal shows motion activity and potential pause — what the Eleventh Circuit docket reveals
Court filings show United States v. Donald Trump, docketed as 24‑12311 in the Eleventh Circuit, is an active criminal appeal after a notice of appeal filed July 17, 2024. The appellate docket includes multiple motions — a request to hold the appeal in abeyance and a motion to voluntarily dismiss — demonstrating procedural maneuvering that can delay or reshape appellate review. The matter originated in the Southern District of Florida and reflects contested positions from both appellant and appellee, with briefing and appendices filed by the government. These docket entries indicate the appeal is live and subject to change as motions are resolved [1].
2. The New York falsified‑records conviction remains the most visible criminal verdict under appeal in 2025
Multiple analyses document Trump’s New York conviction for falsifying business records related to a hush‑money payment, with sentencing scheduled for November 26 (as reported in January and May 2025 coverage). Defense lawyers signaled intent to appeal any custodial sentence, and coverage notes that appeals and post‑trial filings were expected to follow the conviction. The New York case stands out because it produced a jury verdict and an imminent sentencing, which typically triggers immediate appellate deadlines and strategic filings. Reporting frames the appeal as likely and consequential to the sentence’s immediate enforceability [2] [4].
3. The Jan. 6 prosecution was in legal flux after a Supreme Court immunity ruling — not simply an appeal
Sources report the D.C. Circuit returned the Jan. 6 election‑subversion matter to trial judge Tanya Chutkan after the Supreme Court’s decision on presidential immunity. This action resumed the lower‑court proceedings rather than describing a finished conviction on appeal. That distinction matters: returning a case to a district judge signals ongoing threshold litigation about immunity and trialability, not a conventional post‑conviction appellate record. The coverage highlights renewed district‑court activity rather than an appellate appeal of a conviction in 2025 [3].
4. News trackers and legal outlets cover multiple cases — context matters for what’s “under appeal”
The Washington Post’s tracker and similar coverage compile four criminal matters — New York, D.C., Georgia, and the Eleventh Circuit federal docket referenced above — and they emphasize different stages across the cases: convictions, pretrial disputes, and appellate filings. Aggregators can conflate matters at different procedural stages, so ‘under appeal’ can mean (a) a formal notice of appeal after conviction, (b) interlocutory appeals of pretrial rulings, or (c) administrative motions to hold appeals in abeyance. Readers should parse whether reporting refers to a post‑conviction appellate docket or to pretrial appellate activity when assessing claims [4] [2].
5. Analysts disagree about the practical effects of appeals and political developments on sentencing and enforcement
Legal commentary in these sources explores the possible practical outcomes: some attorneys argue a presidential victory and lack of prior convictions may reduce the likelihood of incarceration, and that appeals or stays could delay execution of any sentence. Other reporting focuses on formal appellate steps already filed, such as the Eleventh Circuit docket motions and New York appellate notices. The factual record shows appellate filings exist; interpretations about eventual incarceration or delays reflect differing legal judgments and potential political consequences rather than settled legal outcomes [4].
6. Procedural nuance: motions to stay, abeyance, and voluntary dismissal change the appellate landscape
Court dockets in the Eleventh Circuit reflect motions to hold appeals in abeyance and to voluntarily dismiss, and the New York filing posture anticipates an appeal from a conviction with sentencing imminent. These procedural tools are important because they can pause appellate review, consolidate issues, or terminate appeals preemptively — each option alters timelines and the public’s ability to read a case as ‘actively appealed’. The presence of motions, not just notices, means the appellate posture remains contingent on judicial rulings on those motions [1].
7. What the combined record supports and where uncertainty persists
Taken together, the sources establish that at least the Eleventh Circuit docketed criminal appeal and the New York falsified‑records conviction generated clear appellate activity in 2025, while the Jan. 6 matter was returned to district court for further proceedings after a Supreme Court decision. Uncertainty remains about final appellate outcomes, whether stays will delay enforcement, and how political developments might affect practical enforcement, because filings and motions can change case status quickly and reporters emphasize different aspects of the litigation. Readers should watch docket entries and official court orders for definitive status updates [1] [2] [3] [4].