This comes as the court has agreed to review whether Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis should be disqualified.
The Georgia Court of Appeals ordered on June 5 a stay on all proceedings in Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’s case against former President Donald Trump and eight codefendants, challenging the district attorney’s ability to prosecute the case.
“The proceedings below in the Superior Court of Fulton County are hereby stayed pending the outcome of these appeals,” reads an order by the court clerk, citing a Georgia Supreme Court case ordering the stay of criminal case proceedings during an interlocutory review.
This comes as the court has agreed to review whether Ms. Willis should be disqualified.
The appeals court on June 4 set a hearing in October for former President Donald Trump’s appeal of a Fulton County judge’s decision not to disqualify prosecutor Ms. Willis.
The defendants were notified to file their brief by June 23, and the district attorney has 20 days after that to file a reply brief. Oral arguments will take place before a three-judge panel.
Ms. Willis has charged the defendants with violating the state’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act through their actions to challenge the 2020 presidential election results. Earlier this year, defendant Michael Roman moved to disqualify the district attorney alleging a conflict of interest and financial misconduct, and codefendants joined with additional allegations of prosecutorial misconduct.
The initial Jan. 8 motion set off a chain of investigations into the district attorney’s office, and after the February evidentiary hearing the election case was clouded by the revelation of Ms. Willis’s affair with her hired prosecutor and alleged financial misconduct.
In March, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee ruled that while there was an appearance of impropriety, disqualification was not necessary. However, he acknowledged he was in novel legal territory and allowed defendants to appeal his decision to a higher court. The appeals court agreed to review the ruling last month.
While the trial court judge had ruled that he could continue to hear motions and issue rulings in the interim, that will now come to a stop.
