Resolves based on day that his custodial sentence starts, or "never" if he dies without serving a custodial sentence. Markets close will be extended as needed.
What counts?
Prison, jail or house arrest pre-conviction does not, must be serving a sentence.
Prison, jail or house arrest post-conviction counts.
Community service, probation, and other non-custodial sentences do not count.
It does not count if he is pardoned or otherwise granted clemency before his imprisonment.
Related questions
This market has slightly imprecise wording: Arguably it would resolve "Never" if he dies or is released before fully serving the custodial sentence. You might want to change the language "if he dies without serving a custodial sentence" to "if he dies without beginning to serve a custodial sentence" for clarity.
@ForTruth your interpretation is correct, it is about when/if he starts to serve, not whether he survives the sentence.
Prison, jail or house arrest pre-conviction does not, must be serving a sentence.
I would guess no, based on this? Not an expert.
@jacksonpolack I think in this case it might be a sentence, since it's ordered by a judge. (I am no lawyer tho, which is why I'm asking)
@Odoacre I looked into this a few days ago and my conclusion was that if he was detained it wouldn't be "post-conviction" technically.
For that to be true he'd need to go through a whole other trial and be convicted for contempt of court, which does happen for more serious disruption to the courtroom like being violent. For just violating a gag order, it's a weird corner of the law where the judge can lock him up without convicting him.
@Joshua AFAIK there's no trial for contempt of court, the judge represents the court and can impose fines or jail time.
@Joshua I think you may have misunderstood your research, if a person commits a crime in court (eg assaults a judge) the judge may hold them in contempt and jail them for some time, and then later the person will be tried for assault, not for contempt
By contrast, contempt under New York Penal Code section 215.50—which is not being sought here—is a crime. Criminal contempt in the second degree, a misdemeanor, covers the same general type of conduct as in the Judiciary code, including “disorderly, contemptuous, or insolent behavior” committed in the court’s “immediate view and presence” that tends to interrupt its proceedings or challenge its authority. Criminal contempt in the first degree, a felony, covers threats of physical danger. For contempt under the Penal Code section 215.51, a defendant would be formally charged with a crime with an accusatory instrument, resulting in a separate proceeding where the people would have to prove the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The maximum penalties are also higher than under the Judiciary Code, with second-degree contempt potentially resulting in one year of imprisonment and first-degree contempt, a class E felony, having a maximum penalty of up to four years of imprisonment. Criminal contempt under both the Judiciary and Penal Codes must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
@Joshua yes, that's what I said
a defendant would be formally charged with a crime with an accusatory instrument
the way I understand that "a crime" here means whatever they did to cause the contempt.
@Odoacre The text I quoted above is describing the kind of contempt and sentencing that would resolve this market.
What Trump is currently being threatened with is jail time without any trial, and so would not resolve this market.
I believe Martin also commented on this s few months ago, although I can't find the exact comment right now.
@Joshua and anyway the section that applies here is the other one
A. Judiciary Code Sections 750 & 751 (at issue here)
The DA’s Office has asked the court to punish Trump for criminal contempt violations under sections 750 and 751 of the Judiciary Code. Section 750 covers disorderly conduct before the court, publication of a “grossly inaccurate report” of a proceeding, and—as DANY has alleged—“willful disobedience to [the court’s] lawful mandate.” NY JUD 751(A)(3). Section 751 provides the penalties for contempt, including a fine up to $1,000 and/or 30 days in jail per incident. Despite the name, criminal contempt under the Judiciary Code is not a crime. Criminal contempt proceedings under the Judiciary Code “are neither civil nor criminal. They are sui generis special proceedings to coerce future obedience or punish past disobedience.” The order to show cause motion filed by the DA’s office serves as the accusatory instrument. The hearing will provide the fact finding before the judge, who will have to find that the defendant violated the order beyond a reasonable doubt.
These are special judiciary proceedings that are separate from civil or criminal, but it's still a sentence
@Joshua actually it may make a difference. Law 750 says:
A court of record has power to punish for a criminal contempt, a person guilty of any of the following acts, and no others:
<long list of stuff>
and to Convict means:
declare (someone) to be guilty of a criminal offence by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge in a court of law.
therefore it is a conviction if it happens under law 750
@Odoacre I believe the key thing here is that it's not a criminal offense. But @MartinRandall can you weigh in?
@Joshua you are moving the goalposts quite a bit.
the merriam webster does not have "criminal" as part of the definition
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/convict
convicted; convicting; convicts
: to find or prove to be guilty
The jury convicted them of fraud.
@Odoacre If we want to be rules lawyers the description literally says "Prison, jail or house arrest pre-conviction does not, must be serving a sentence." Contempt is not a coviction.
I to an extent think that such rules lawyering is bad, and it'd be better to have independent judges interpret the description reasonably, but it does literally say "jail pre-conviction does not".
@jacksonpolack who says it's not a convitction ? And if rule layering is bad why are you all lawyering me ?
@Odoacre Conviction is finding someone guilty of a crime. Contempt under 750 is not a crime, so you can't be convicted of it.
If this were not true, all the markets about Trump being convicted of any crime before X date would already have resolved yes based on Trump having been found in contempt and fined.
Rules lawyering definitely seems called for in markets about the law, we want to make sure we are using these terms correctly.
@Joshua I don't think I have anything to add to what I said earlier. It must be post-conviction, contempt jailings appear to vary in that respect, but mostly seem to not require a conviction. I don't want to decide in advance on every possible contempt jailing that might happen.