Hunter Biden is seeking a new trial in his federal gun case, citing a procedural issue related to the timing of the trial that led to a guilty verdict against him. His legal team argues that the trial court lacked jurisdiction over his case due to appeals he had filed contesting his prosecution.
The defense asserts that the conviction should be overturned because, although the appeals court had rejected Biden's appeals before the trial commenced in early June, it had not issued a 'mandate' informing the lower court of its decisions. This absence of a mandate, according to Biden's lawyers, meant that the trial court did not have the authority to proceed with the trial.
Following the 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals' rulings dismissing two of Biden's appeals in late May, his legal team contends that the trial court lacked jurisdiction when it empaneled the jury on June 3, 2024, and proceeded with the trial.
US District Judge Maryellen Noreika, the trial judge, had previously expressed her opinion that Biden's appeals of her pre-trial rulings would not strip the court of its jurisdiction. Biden's lawyers initially filed a motion for a new trial on June 17 but subsequently withdrew the filing from the docket.
The legal dispute revolves around the interpretation of jurisdictional issues and the significance of the appeals court's mandate in the context of the trial proceedings. The outcome of Biden's request for a new trial will depend on how the court addresses these procedural complexities.
