Since March of 2023, Donald Trump has been indicted by grand juries on six occasions in four criminal cases, was convicted by a jury once, took one mug shot, was ordered to pay millions in damages by two civil juries, and was found liable for civil fraud by a Manhattan judge.

But as Trump nears his return to the White House following his election victory this month, his criminal and civil legal issues are beginning to fade into the background of his rapidly moving presidential transition.

Trump has denied wrongdoing and pleaded not guilty in each criminal case, and denies all wrongdoing in the civil cases. His return to the presidency is likely to result in his four criminal cases being dismissed or placed on hold for at least four years.

Here is the status of each of his major cases.

New York hush money case

More than a year after he was indicted in New York on criminal charges of falsifying business records, Trump was convicted by a jury in May on 34 felony counts related to a hush money payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in order to boost Trump’s electoral prospects in the 2016 presidential election.

Trump was originally scheduled to be sentenced in July, but his lawyers sought to have the case dismissed based on the Supreme Court’s new ruling on presidential immunity, arguing that the conviction relied on evidence that should be off-limits. The judge in the case, Juan Merchan, has not yet issued a ruling on the impact of the high court’s immunity decision.

After Trump won the election, his lawyers again pushed to have the case dismissed by arguing that sitting presidents should be immune from prosecution. Prosecutors have rebuffed that claim, arguing that Trump has already been convicted for entirely private conduct — but they signaled a willingness to delay Trump’s sentencing until he leaves office in 2029.

Judge Merchan has not yet weighed in on either motion to dismiss the case. Trump’s sentencing is still scheduled for Nov. 26, though it is unlikely to proceed as planned.

Federal election interference case

Eight months after special counsel Jack Smith assumed control over the investigation into Trump’s alleged election interference, a Washington, D.C., grand jury indicted Trump in August 2023 on criminal charges that he unlawfully sought to overturn the results of the 2020 election in order to remain in power — but the case was sidelined as Trump’s lawyers appealed based on presidential immunity.

The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in July that Trump should benefit from the presumption of immunity for any official acts undertaken while in office, and returned the case to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to determine if the allegations contain official acts.

Prosecutors then revised their case against Trump — removing any allegations related to official acts, including Trump’s use of the Justice Department — and had a grand jury issue a new indictment against the former president in August.

Trump was reelected as Judge Chutkan was in the process of evaluating which parts of the indictment would be covered by presidential immunity. Smith then paused the case to “assess this unprecedented circumstance and determine the appropriate course going forward consistent with Department of Justice policy.”

Smith is expected to wind down his case against Trump over the coming months due to the longstanding Department of Justice policy prohibiting the prosecution of a sitting president. He faces a Dec. 2 deadline to advise the court of his next steps.

Smith is also expected to issue a final report of his findings to Attorney General Merrick Garland, who will face the decision of whether to publicly release the materials.

Federal classified documents case

In the other case brought by special counsel Jack Smith, a federal grand jury in Florida indicted Trump and his aide Walt Nauta in June 2023 on criminal charges of retaining classified documents after leaving the White House and taking steps to thwart the government’s efforts to get them back.

In July 2023, the grand jury returned a superseding indictment against Trump and Nauta, as well as Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos De Oliveira.

Overseeing the case for nearly a year, Judge Aileen Cannon — who Trump nominated to the bench — took up novel legal arguments posed by defense lawyers and delayed major rulings, preventing the case from reaching a trial. She ultimately dismissed the case in July over her finding that Smith was improperly appointed to his role.

Smith appealed Cannon’s ruling to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that legal precedent and history confirm the attorney general’s ability to appoint special counsels. But after Trump’s reelection, he asked the court to pause the appeal last week to evaluate the “unprecedented circumstances” as a result of the DOJ policy prohibiting sitting president from being prosecuted.

The case is now on pause until Dec. 2 while Smith evaluates his options to wind down the case, including whether to possibly proceed with the case only against Trump’s co-defendants.

Georgia election interference case

In August, Trump and 18 co-defendants were criminally charged in a sweeping racketeering indictment related to their alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election results in the state of Georgia, including Trump’s asking Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to “find” the votes needed to win after losing to Joe Biden.

Four of the defendants in the case took plea deals, while some of the remaining defendants launched an effort to have District Attorney Fani Willis, who brought the case, disqualified over her relationship with a fellow prosecutor.

Fulton County Judge Scott McAfee declined to disqualify Willis if the prosecutor resigned, but the case has been paused as Trump and his co-defendants appeal the decision. An oral argument for the appeal was initially scheduled for Dec. 5 but was unexpectedly canceled this week without explanation.

In the meantime, Judge McAfee has also chipped away at the indictment, tossing five of the 13 counts with which Trump was originally charged.

If the case ever returns to the trial court, Trump’s lawyers could mount a presidential immunity defense to try to have the case dismissed, according to experts. When asked what the impact of a Trump election victory would be, defense attorney Steve Sadow suggested last year that the case would likely have to wait until Trump leaves office.

The Fulton County district attorney’s office has previously declined to comment about the future of the case.

New York civil fraud case

After a lengthy civil trial last year, a New York Judge found Trump, his adult sons, and their business associates civilly liable for committing a decade of business fraud.

With interest, Trump and his co-defendants owe nearly $489 million and face prohibitions against running a company in New York. They arranged a $175 million bond secured with cash held in Trump’s Charles Schwab account.

A New York appeals court appeared receptive to some of Trump’s arguments challenging the ruling in September, with one judge characterizing the penalty as “troubling.” A ruling on Trump’s appeal is expected sometime over the coming months, and Trump could further appeal the decision to New York’s highest court.

E. Jean Carroll civil cases

Trump owes the writer E. Jean Carroll nearly $90 million after he lost two civil trials to the former Elle magazine columnist.

In 2023, a jury awarding Carroll $5 million in damages when it found Trump liable for sexually abusing her in the dressing room of a Manhattan department store in the 1990s then later defaming her on social media.

The following year, a separate jury awarded Carroll an additional $83.3 million for defamatory statements Trump made while president.

Trump secured the smaller judgment with cash, and used a bond from Virginia-based Federal Insurance Company totaling $91,630,000 for the second judgment. He has appealed both cases.

In September, a federal appeals court appeared skeptical of Trump’s push for a new civil trial, suggesting it would be “very hard” to overturn the jury’s 2023 verdict.

“Mr. Trump’s election to the presidency does nothing to change either the fact, as determined by two separate juries, that he sexually assaulted and defamed Ms. Carroll, or the applicable legal principles under which he was held liable for that conduct,” Carroll’s attorney, Roberta Kaplan, said in a statement this month after the election.