'Deck stacked against' Trump as he faces years in N.Y. felony appeals process: experts

Should Donald Trump appeal his conviction on 34 felony counts in New York as expected, he shouldn't count on a quick resolution in a process that could run years — well past the November presidential election.

Add to that, the New York Times is reporting that appeals courts in the state of New York are reluctant to overturn judgments unless the circumstances are particularly egregious with few legal experts seeing evidence of that in the former president's trial.

With that in mind, the Times is reporting that Trump is bucking up against a "stacked deck" that is not in his favor.

ALSO READ: Five questions you must ask yourself before voting in November

According to Barry Kamins, a retired judge who teaches at Brooklyn Law School, Trump's case is like no other which could slow down the process, with Kamins telling the Times, "This is all uncharted territory, as far as an appellate issue.”

Adding to Trump's woes is the fact that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has assigned a seasoned expert in the appeals process, attorney Steven Wu, "to ensure that Mr. Trump does not escape his conviction."

The slow pace of the process in New York also does not favor the former president.

With Judge Juan Merchan setting July 11 as Trump's sentencing date, the Times reports, "The sentencing will start a 30-day clock for Mr. Trump to file a notice of appeal. That notice is just a legal stake in the ground. Mr. Trump will then have to mount the actual appeal at the New York State’s Appellate Division, First Department. The panel of appellate court judges most likely would not hear arguments until next year, and might not issue a decision until early 2026."

The report goes on to note that D.A. Bragg could grind Trump's legal team down even more by asking the New York Court of Appeals, New York's highest court, to review any rulings from the lower court.

According to Mark Zauderer, a longtime New York litigator, Trump's lower court ruling doesn't appear to be one suitable for review by the Supreme Court.

“This is a garden-variety state court conviction. I don't see a plausible path to the Supreme Court,” he explained.

You can read more here.