New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan is poised to decide Tuesday whether to overturn the president-elect’s conviction, which stems from a jury finding him guilty of falsifying business records to conceal a hush money payment to a porn star. Trump fought the allegations in New York state court but was found guilty by a 12-member jury.

Legal experts have said the punishment for this conviction could result in up to four years in jail in addition to financial penalties. But given Trump’s return to the White House in under 80 days and his preparations to lead the country over the next four years, experts say Trump may expect only a fine, if not a complete dismissal of the case, before his scheduled Nov. 26 sentencing.

The sentencing was supposed to take place in September before Merchan postponed it in light of defense attorneys citing a July 1 Supreme Court decision that granted former presidents some immunity from official acts. While the high court’s decision mainly applied to Trump’s two separate federal cases, defense attorneys nevertheless said it should extend to the hush money case.

Harvard Law School professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz told the Washington Examiner that “it’s certainly possible the sentencing will not happen.”

“It should not happen,” said Dershowitz, a veteran appellate lawyer who has handled hundreds of high-level celebrity cases, including serving as Trump’s counsel during his first impeachment.

“I don’t understand the case against Trump in New York. If I had a class in criminal law, and they asked me to describe the conviction against Donald Trump, I couldn’t do it. And so if you can’t even describe it or understand it, this is just no crime here. I think the only real impact of the New York cases, it probably contributed slightly to Trump’s election,” Dershowitz said.

Merchan delayed sentencing until after the Tuesday election to consider the immunity decision and to determine if sentencing should proceed, “if necessary.” If sentencing is a go, Merchan is weighing whether Trump should return to court at the end of this month or if sentencing should be postponed until after his Jan. 20 inauguration.

The Supreme Court in Trump v. United States found former presidents enjoy some level of immunity from criminal prosecutions for official acts. The ruling derived from an appeal in the 2020 election subversion case brought by federal prosecutors, but Trump has sought to use it as a precedent for the dismissal of the hush money case in New York state court.

If Merchan gave a favorable ruling for Trump, either by overturning his conviction based on the Supreme Court ruling or by delaying sentencing, it would remove one of the four criminal cases that have hung like a cloud over him as he pursued his bid for reelection.

While legal experts suggest a full prison term is highly unlikely, Trump could face penalties including fines or probation. Some anticipate a fine if sentencing occurs before the inauguration, though the timing remains uncertain.

Meanwhile, the Justice Department is reviewing how to handle two federal cases against Trump led by special counsel Jack Smith, in line with long-standing policy not to prosecute sitting presidents. State-level charges in Georgia related to alleged attempts to overturn the 2020 election remain unresolved.

Trump, who is 78, pleaded not guilty in all four cases, describing them as politically motivated efforts to obstruct his campaign. He would be 82 by the time he finishes his second term as president, and some experts have even indicated that Trump’s age and a lack of a criminal record could be factors in determining a punishment after a New York jury found him guilty in May.

The jury found him guilty on all 34 felony counts he was charged with in connection to falsifying business records to conceal hush money payments made to porn star Stormy Daniels in the final days of his 2016 campaign, making him the first ex-president in America to become a convicted felon. Trump has denied allegations of an affair with Daniels and decried the case by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg as a “witch hunt.”

Trump spokesman Steve Cheung said last Friday that the sentencing should not stand, saying: “It is now abundantly clear that Americans want an immediate end to the weaponization of our justice system, so we can, as President Trump said in his historic victory speech, unify our country and work together for the betterment of our nation.”

The president-elect’s lawyers argue the Manhattan case should be dismissed because the July Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity bars evidence of official acts in trials focused on personal conduct. The defense team contends that the jury saw evidence, including social media posts and former aides’ testimony, linked to his presidency.

However, prosecutors from Bragg’s office argue that Trump’s actions were personal and not protected by presidential immunity.