Former President Donald Trump is expected to appeal any court decisions that go against him. Indeed it is common for attorneys to plant the seeds of appeal during the first go of a case, trying to reveal bias or some other malfeasance by the court or prosecution — the basis of a future appeal — as much as win the case the first time, especially if the facts are unfriendly.
New York Attorney General Letitia James, prosecuting Donald Trump’s company in a civil trial about alleged real estate fraud, understands this well, says Lisa Rubin, a former litigator and current legal analyst at MSNBC.
It’s with the foreknowledge of Trump’s inevitable appeals that James is asking Judge Arthur Engoron, Rubin says, for a full briefing and separate hearing on Trump’s mistrial motion in the case, even though the prosecution asserts that Trump’s motion lacks merit.
Note: Engoron could simply reject the motion outright before any further briefing or argument. That the AG is asking for both shows that it realizes that a well-documented win is preferable to a faster one, given the inevitable appeals of any and all decisions in its favor.
— Lisa Rubin (@lawofruby) November 16, 2023
Rubin says that James is “asking for both” — the briefing and hearing — out of an abundance of caution and an attempt to make Judge Engoron’s ultimate decision appeal-proof. The request illustrates that the DA “realizes that a well-documented win is preferable to a faster one, given the inevitable appeals of any and all decisions in its favor.”
The Office of the District Attorney writes in its request:
“OAG’s position is that – putting aside the total lack of merit to Defendants’ application for a mistrial – it is preferable to have the Court hear and decide the application on full briefing pursuant to the OSC in the interest of judicial economy. This approach would avoid the potential for motion practice before the Appellate Division.”
.jpg){kind=link}