Lawyers for hip-hop mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs filed a petition with the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan, demanding that he be released from prison immediately and that his conviction on prostitution-related charges be overturned.
A Plea for Immediate Release
The filing, submitted late Tuesday, argues that the federal judge who sentenced Combs treated him harshly and allowed evidence from charges he was acquitted of to influence the punishment. Lawyers say the judge acted like a “thirteenth juror” when he imposed a four-year, two-month term in October. They contend that this decision ignored the jury’s verdict and the lack of coercion found at trial.
The Context of the Case
Combs, 56, is serving time at a federal prison in New Jersey and is scheduled for release in May 2028. He was acquitted in July of racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking charges, but was convicted under the Mann Act for transporting people across state lines for sexual purposes. The court found him guilty of two lesser prostitution offenses that did not involve force, fraud, or coercion.
Lawyers’ Argument for a New Sentence
In their brief, the attorneys requested that the appeals court either acquit Combs, order his immediate release, or direct the sentencing judge to reduce the four-year sentence. They note that defendants typically receive sentences of less than 15 months for these types of offenses, even when coercion is alleged. “Defendants typically get sentenced to less than 15 months for these offenses – even when coercion, which the jury didn’t find here, is involved,” the lawyers wrote.
Allegations That Influenced Sentencing
Judge Arun Subramanian, who imposed the sentence, considered testimony from two former girlfriends. One, Casandra “Cassie” Ventura, testified that Combs ordered her to engage in “disgusting” sex with strangers hundreds of times during their decade-long relationship that ended in 2018. The jury also viewed video of him dragging and beating her in a Los Angeles hotel hallway after a multiday “freak-off.”
Additional Testimony
The second former girlfriend, who used the pseudonym “Jane,” claimed she was pressured into sex with male workers during what Combs described as “hotel nights.” These encounters, she said, took place from 2021 to 2024, were drug-fueled, and sometimes lasted days. Both witnesses reported that Combs watched and filmed the encounters, and that he sometimes masturbated during them.
Judge’s Rejection of the Defense
At sentencing, Subramanian explicitly rejected the defense’s attempt to frame the incidents as merely intimate, consensual experiences or a “sex, drugs, and rock ‘n’ roll” story. He stated, “You abused the power and control that you had over the lives of women you professed to love dearly. You abused them physically, emotionally, and psychologically. And you used that abuse to get your way, especially when it came to freak-offs and hotel nights.”
The Judge’s Findings
The judge further declared that he found Combs “coerced,” “exploited,” and “forced” his girlfriends to have sex and led a criminal conspiracy. “The judge defied the jury’s verdict and found Combs ‘coerced,’ ‘exploited,’ and ‘forced’ his girlfriends to have sex and led a criminal conspiracy. These judicial findings trumped the verdict and led to the highest sentence ever imposed for any remotely similar defendant,” the lawyers wrote.
The Legal Basis for the Appeal
The attorneys argue that the judge’s reliance on evidence from the acquitted charges violated the principle that a sentencing judge must consider only the evidence presented to the jury. They claim that the judge’s actions effectively turned the sentencing into a second trial, undermining the jury’s role.
Potential Outcomes
If the appeals court sides with the lawyers, Combs could be released from prison immediately, or his conviction could be reversed, nullifying the four-year sentence. Alternatively, the court could order Judge Subramanian to reduce the term to a more typical length for the offenses involved.
The Broader Implications
This case highlights the tension between sentencing discretion and the limits imposed by a jury’s verdict. It also underscores how convictions on lesser charges can carry significant prison time, especially when a judge considers broader allegations.
Key Takeaways
- Diddy’s attorneys seek immediate release, reversal of conviction, or sentence reduction.
- Judge Subramanian’s sentencing relied on testimony from two former girlfriends, leading to a four-year, two-month term.
- The appeal argues that the judge’s actions violated the jury’s verdict and typical sentencing ranges for similar offenses.
Conclusion
The 2nd Circuit will review the filing, but no oral arguments have yet been scheduled. The outcome of this appeal could reshape how courts handle sentencing when evidence from acquitted charges is considered. Until a decision is made, Combs remains incarcerated with a release date set for May 2028.
