Prosecutors have entered the courtroom, with Joshua Steinglass, Matthew Colangelo and Susan Hoffinger positioned behind counsel table.

Former President Trump has arrived at the courthouse.

The courtroom is filled to capacity this morning with more than 60 reporters crammed in the gallery's wooden benches.

Over 150 members of the press and public lined up outside the courthouse this morning vying for admittance. The line appeared to be the longest of the entire trial.

The courtroom itself is a balmy 76 degrees this morning, after weeks of chilly temperatures that prompted Trump to complain about sitting in the cold conditions.

Former President Trump is expected to be joined by a number of his children for today's critical day in court.

Trump is set to be accompanied by his sons Eric and Don Jr., his daughter-in-law Lara Trump, and -- for the first time -- his daughter Tiffany, according to the Trump campaign.

It would be the largest family showing for Trump since the criminal trial began six weeks ago.

After five weeks of testimony, jurors in former President Trump's hush money case are scheduled to hear closing arguments today.

Prosecutors with the Manhattan district attorney's office and attorneys for Trump are both set to deliver closing statements.

Judge Juan Merchan is then expected to delivery jury instructions on Wednesday, after which jurors will begin deliberations.

Judge Merchan reread the portion of the instructions about Michael Cohen's testimony because he is an "accomplice" the in alleged crime.

This is a standard legal instruction about the testimony of an accomplice. Per the instructions, the jury cannot convict based solely on Cohen's testimony unless it is corroborated by evidence. If he testified about something to which there is no other evidence or testimony, the jury cannot convict on that testimony alone.

Those instructions read as follows:

Under our law, Michael Cohen is an accomplice because there is evidence that he participated in a crime based upon conduct involved in the allegations here against the defendant.

Our law is especially concerned about the testimony of an accomplice who implicates another in the commission of a crime, particularly when the accomplice has received, expects or hopes for a benefit in return for his testimony.

Therefore, our law provides that a defendant may not be convicted of any crime upon the testimony of an accomplice unless it is supported by corroborative evidence tending to connect the defendant with the commission of that crime.

In other words, even if you find the testimony of Michael Cohen to be believable, you may not convict the defendant solely upon that testimony unless you also find that it was corroborated by other evidence tending to connect the defendant with the commission of the crime.

The corroborative evidence need not, by itself, prove that a crime was committed or that the defendant is guilty. What the law requires is that there be evidence that tends to connect the defendant with the commission of the crime charged in such a way as may reasonably satisfy you that the accomplice is telling the truth about the defendant's participation in that crime.

In determining whether there is the necessary corroboration, you may consider whether there is material, believable evidence, apart from the testimony of Michael Cohen, which itself tends to connect the defendant with the commission of the crime.