The defense is arguing a candidate's expenses arising from controversies are not necessarily campaign expenses.

Merchan suggests the language should be as follows: "If the payment would have been made, even in the absence of the candidacy, the payment should not be treated as a contribution."

Prosecutors have argued the payment to Stormy Daniels should have been labeled a campaign expenditure because it was meant to protect Trump's electoral prospects in 2016

Merchan reserves his decision on the issue but suggests he would include both proposed sentences from the parties.

Defense attorney Emil Bove argued that Judge Merchan should tell the jury it must find Trump acted willfully in order to convict.

The district attorney's office argued the jury must find Trump acted unlawfully, not necessarily criminally.

Judge Merchan said he would reserve his decision about whether to include "willful" in the jury charge

Trump was alert and attentive at the start of this afternoon's session, whispering to his attorney Todd Blanche. Now his eyes are closed.

Judge Merchan, ticking through each of the proposed edits to the jury instructions, appears to be focused on making sure the instructions are clear and understandable for the jury.

"We want to make it as easy as possible for the jury," he said.

Judge Merchan declined to add a sentence to the jury charge that there was no limit on Trump's personal contributions to his political campaign in 2015 and 2016.

Defense attorney Emil Bove argued that the line would have told the jury that Trump “could have paid this out of his personal expenses without issue.”

But prosecutors argued that the line was “extraneous” because Trump made the Stormy Daniels payment reimbursement from the Trump Organization, not out of his personal funds.

“It has nothing to do with the case,” Colangelo said.

Defense attorney Emil Bove began the conference by arguing for a jury instruction describing the alleged conspiracy as civil, not criminal.

According to Bove, prosecutors have failed to show that the alleged conspiracy had a criminal object.

“It’s only a crime if it has a criminal object,” Bove said. "To be a criminal conspiracy, there must be a criminal object.”

Donald Trump said Wednesday that he didn't take the stand in his hush money trial because he didn't agree with the judge's rulings -- and because he was seemingly worried about information that could have come out during cross-examination.

"He made rulings that makes it very difficult to testify," Trump said in an interview on WABC Radio, referring to Judge Juan Merchan. "Anything I did, anything I did in the past, they can bring everything up, and you know what, I've had a great past -- but anything."

"The other reason is because they have no case," Trump said. "In other words, why would -- why testify when they have no case?"

Trump had originally indicated he would testify, saying on April 12 that "I would testify, absolutely." But he subsequently appeared to back away from the idea, falsely telling reporters on May 2 that the limited gag order in the case -- which prohibits extrajudicial statements about witnesses and jurors -- prevented him from testifying.

The next day in court, Judge Merchan directly addressed Trump to clarify that he has an "absolute right" to testify and that the limited gag order does not apply to his statements in court.

"I want to stress, Mr. Trump, that you have an absolute right to testify at trial, if that is what you decide to do after consultation with your attorneys," Merchan said.

-Lalee Ibssa, Soo Rin Kim and Kelsey Walsh