Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass, at the end of the afternoon's pre-charge conference, argued that the jury's instructions should include that retainer agreements are legally required for lawyers to begin conducting work for a client.

Prosecutors have argued that Trump falsified records because he characterized Michael Cohen's hush money reimbursement as legal expenses pursuant to a retainer agreement. Defense lawyers have argued that Cohen was paid by the company for years and never had a retainer agreement with Trump -- or needed to.

"It is in fact the law," Steinglass said about the requirement to have a retainer.

"We don't think that's right, judge," defense attorney Emil Bove responded.

Judge Juan Merchan said he would review the rules before making a decision.

The judge subsequently ended the conference, telling the attorneys he would aim provide them with the final jury instruction by the end of the day Thursday so they can prepare over the weekend, ahead of the jury getting the case next week.

The proceedings will resume on Tuesday morning with summations.

Judge Merchan flatly told the defense that former President Trump could not make an advice-of-counsel argument.

The judge said the defense was being "disingenuous" by raising it now when Trump was given a deadline months ago to say whether he would invoke the defense that, in his conduct, he was relying on the advice of lawyers.

"It was concerning when notice was not given initially. It was concerning when the term was changed to 'presence of counsel.' I couldn't believe when I saw in your submission, 'involvement of counsel,'" Merchan told the defense regarding their efforts to advance that argument.

"My ruling is the jury will not hear that instruction from the bench, nor are you permitted to make that argument, period," Merchan said.

"I am not being disingenuous with Your Honor," defense attorney Emil Bove said before he attempted to argue in favor of the defense.

"You said that already, Mr. Bove," Merchan said. "This is an argument you have been advancing for many many months. ... It is denied. It is not going to happen."

Trump, at the defense table, scribbled a note and passed it to defense attorney Todd Blanche.

The defense returned to the question of Michael Cohen's 2018 guilty plea and AMI's non-prosecution agreement with the federal government.

Defense attorney Emil Bove called it a "critical issue" the jury could infer Trump's guilt based on his association with Cohen and AMI executive David Pecker.

Prosecutor Josh Steinglass called the curative language the defense suggested "outrageous," and Judge Merchan said he would stick to what he told the jury during the evidentiary phase of the trial: That the guilty plea of Cohen and the non-prosecution agreement of AMI could be used to judge witness credibility -- but could not be used as an inference of the defendant's guilt.

Defense lawyers asked Judge Merchan to include an instruction for jurors that clarifies how prominent Republicans and members of the public reacted to the release of the infamous "Access Hollywood" tape.

Witnesses like Trump aides Hope Hicks and Madeleine Westerhout testified about the effect of the video, which led prominent Republicans like John McCain withdrawing their endorsement of Trump and the Republican National Committee considering finding a new candidate.

Prosecutors pushed back on the defense request, describing it as "confusing" and "unnecessary."

"The nature of the reaction by the Republican Party by other prominent Republican senators by other members of the public -- the fact that was the reaction -- had an impact on the listener being the defendant," prosecutor Josh Steinglass argued.

Prosecutors have argued that the immense public backlash to the Access Hollywood motivated Trump to kill the Stormy Daniels story in the days before the election.

Judge Merchan said he would review the relevant portions of the transcript before making a decision, but said he was inclined to agree with the state, suggesting the proposed instruction would be denied.

Michael Cohen testified under redirect examination that he had nothing at stake in the outcome of Trump's criminal trial.

"Are you actually on trial here?" Hoffinger asked.

"No ma'am," Cohen said.

"Are you a witness here?" Hoffinger asked.

"I am," Cohen said.

"Are you charged with any crimes here?" Hoffinger asked.

"No ma'am," Cohen said.

While Cohen was subpoenaed to testify at this trial, he described his outlook about the trial as markedly different from his participation and plea in a 2018 federal investigation.

"My life was on the line. My liberty. I was the defendant in the case," Cohen said.