# Manhattan DA's Office Says Hush-Money Trial Error Would Be 'Harmless'

> Manhattan DA claims Trump's hush-money case had 'harmless error' even if presidential immunity was violated.
- Title: Manhattan DA's Office Says Hush-Money Trial Error Would Be…
- Summary: Manhattan DA claims Trump's hush-money case had 'harmless error' even if presidential immunity was violated.
- Keywords: manhattan da, alvin bragg, presidential immunity, hush money, trump, stormy danials, feca, new york supreme court, jimmy merchan, trump v united states, michael cohen, Law & Crime
- Source: Law & Crime — https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/simply-does-not-attach-manhattan-das-office-argues-it-would-be-harmless-error-even-if-presidential-immunity-was-violated-in-hush-money-trial
- Read time: 2 min
- Topics: manhattan da, alvin bragg, presidential immunity, hush money, trump, stormy danials, feca, new york supreme court, jimmy merchan, trump v united states, michael cohen, crime
## Manhattan DA's Office
Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg's office argues that even if certain evidence shouldn't have been used at trial, it was a 'harmless error'.

> harmless error
## Trump's Legal Team
Attorney Robert Giuffra argued the prosecution was 'infected by multiple fatal errors under New York and federal law'.

> infected by multiple fatal errors
## FECA Use in Trial
Prosecutors relied on Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) to 'bump up' misdemeanor charges to felonies.

> bump up
## FECA Legal Challenge
Law professor Jed Shugerman argued Congress intended FECA to preempt all state-level election regulation, making Manhattan prosecutors' reliance void.

> preempt all state-level election regulation
## Jury Instructions
Trump's legal team argued jury instructions violated Sixth Amendment jury-unanimity rights by allowing conviction without unanimous agreement on 'unlawful means'.

> unlawful means
## Presidential Immunity
The Supreme Court's Trump v. United States ruling addressed whether evidence like communications with aide Hope Hicks could be used at trial.

> trump v united states
## Harmless Error Defense
Manhattan prosecutors argued that even if evidence was improperly admitted, the 'overwhelming evidence' of Trump's guilt makes any error harmless.

> overwhelming evidence
## FECA Scope
Manhattan prosecutors' chief Steven Wu stated FECA's scope was 'extremely narrow' in this case and did not 'bump up' the charges.

> extremely narrow
## Presidential Immunity Application
Prosecutors argued that immunity does not attach to evidence used to evaluate David Pecker and Michael Cohen's credibility.

> evaluate credibility
## Key Legal Argument
Manhattan DA's office claims the hush-money payments were 'fraudulent transfers' meant to avoid publicity before the 2016 election.

> fraudulent transfers
## Trial Outcome
The Manhattan DA's office maintained that the trial's use of FECA and other evidence was 'harmless error' even if presidential immunity was violated.

> harmless error
## Legal Team Focus
Trump's legal team focused heavily on jury instructions, arguing it was unconstitutional to convict without unanimous agreement on 'unlawful means'.

> unlawful means
## FECA Expert Barred
The trial court barred Trump's FECA expert from testifying, a point Trump's legal team highlighted as a critical error.

> barred
## Appeal Status
The case is currently under appeal with the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division, First Department.

> new york supreme court appellate division
## Presidential Immunity Ruling
The Supreme Court's Trump v. United States ruling was decided roughly one month after the hush-money verdict in 2024.

> trump v united states
## Harmless Error Conclusion
Manhattan prosecutors argued that any error in admitting evidence would be 'harmless' due to the overwhelming evidence of Trump's guilt.

> harmless
## Key takeaway

Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg's office argues that even if Trump's hush-money trial used illegal evidence, the error would be 'harmless' due to overwhelming guilt.