Feb. 16 (UPI) — Ryan Routh, who was convicted of attempting to kill then-former President Donald Trump, has filed an appeal of his life sentence and his conviction.
Routh, 60, was convicted of hiding in the bushes at Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach in September 2024. He pointed a military-grade SKS rifle toward Trump, who was then a candidate running for his second term, and a Secret Service agent.
He defended himself in the trial that ended in September. When the verdict was read, he stabbed himself in the neck with a pen.
Routh was given an attorney for the sentencing portion of his trial. That attorney, Martin L. Roth, filed a notice Friday with the U.S. Court of Appeals stating that Routh will fight the conviction and his sentence, ordered Feb. 4. Routh was sentenced to life plus seven years.
He was convicted in October of all five charges of attempting to assassinate a major presidential candidate, assaulting a federal officer, possession of a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence, being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition, and possessing a firearm with an obliterated serial number.
Secret Service agent Robert Fercano testified that Routh hid behind a shrub-covered fence near the sixth hole of the course, aiming an AK-style weapon at Trump. Routh was found with a handwritten note that stated his intention to kill Trump.
Routh argued that he had a right to peacefully protest at the golf course.
“This is as far [from] peaceful assembly as you can imagine,” Assistant U.S. Attorney John Shipley responded. “Peaceful protest is one thing. An assassination attempt is another.”
Prosecutors said in a court filing that Routh deserved a life sentence.
“Routh’s crimes undeniably warrant a life sentence — he took steps over the course of months to assassinate a major presidential candidate, demonstrated the will to kill anybody in the way, and has since expressed neither regret nor remorse to his victims.”
Routh’s attorney argued that his conviction was faulty.
“Defendant recognizes that he was found guilty by the jury but asserts that the jury was misled by his inability to effectively confront witnesses, use exhibits, or affirmatively introduce impeachment evidence designed to prove his lack of intent to cause injury to anyone,” Roth wrote.