The motion points to the March 15 ruling by Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee allowing Willis to continue prosecuting the case, arguing that McAfee made “explicit factual findings” that Trump and the others had not backed up their claims that Willis had a disqualifying conflict of interest.
“As both this Court and the Supreme Court have repeatedly held, Georgia appellate courts will not disturb a trial court’s factual findings on disputed issues outside of certain, very rare, circumstances,” Wakeford wrote. “When a trial court makes determinations concerning matters of credibility or evidentiary weight, reviewing courts will not disturb those determinations unless they are flatly incorrect.”
The motion argues that McAfee granted Trump and his co-defendants “substantial leeway” in “gathering and submitting evidence” to support claims that Willis should be removed from the case, and that McAfee ultimately found they did not meet the evidentiary burden for removal.
“The trial court’s careful and extensive evaluation of the resulting record, and its utter dismissal of the central evidence proffered by the Appellants, forecloses any possibility of reversal,” Wakeford wrote.
The motion comes days after the appellate court issued a stay in the lower court proceedings against Trump and the eight co-defendants who have sought to remove Willis from the case over claims she had an improper relationship with Nathan Wade, an outside lawyer she appointed to lead the case.
The court had tentatively scheduled oral arguments for early October but postponed them because of a conflict, according to a court spokeswoman.
A new date has not been scheduled, though it was unlikely to be before the fall, if the panel decides to hear oral arguments at all. A three-judge panel selected to hear the case — made up of Trenton Brown, Todd Markle and Benjamin A. Land — has two full terms of its proceedings to issue a ruling, a period that would end in the first week of March 2025. That tentative calendar, if it holds, would almost certainly delay any Trump trial in Georgia until after the November election.
The prosecution filing Wednesday nodded to remote hope among those close to Willis and the district attorney’s office that the appellate court could simply reject the appeal outright — potentially getting the proceedings, which have been at a standstill for months, back on track.
Prosecutors had not been expected to file any motions in the case until July — when they are set to respond to the formal appellate briefs from Trump and the others, due later this month. It was not immediately clear whether the court would take up the motion to dismiss or ask Trump and his co-defendants to formally respond.
Steve Sadow, Trump’s lead attorney in Georgia, who has formally requested oral arguments in the appeal, called the prosecution filing a “last ditch effort to stop any appellate review of DA Willis’s conduct.” He accused prosecutors of omitting McAfee’s criticism of Willis and her behavior in his March order.
“The State’s motion deliberately failed to mention that Judge McAfee’s ruling stated an ‘odor of mendacity remains’ from the hearing testimony by the DA and the State’s witnesses,” Sadow said in an email. “The judge also said there were ‘reasonable questions’ as to whether Willis and former prosecutor Wade testified untruthfully. The State has tried this gambit before with no success.”
But in the prosecution filing, Wakeford argued that McAfee addressed these concerns by asking that either Willis or Wade leave the case. Wade resigned March 15.
Elaine Hadley is a dedicated journalist covering the ever-evolving landscape of U.S. news. With a keen interest in politics and a commitment to uncovering the truth, she provides insightful commentary and in-depth analysis on domestic issues. When not reporting, Elaine enjoys exploring the diverse cultures and landscapes of the United States.
