By Luc Cohen
NEW YORK, April 9 (Reuters) – A U.S. appeals court appeared divided on Thursday about a bid by Sean “Diddy” Combs to overturn the hip-hop mogul’s prison sentence over prostitution charges in a case that raises novel legal questions about how judges consider conduct for which a defendant has been acquitted in determining a punishment.
A three-judge panel of the Manhattan-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in Combs’ request to overturn his 2025 conviction and the sentence of four years and two months given by U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian.
The arguments focused on the defense argument that Subramanian improperly considered evidence that Combs had threatened former girlfriends when determining the sentence last October.
Combs, 56, was found guilty by a jury last July on two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution. The verdict followed a seven-week trial in Manhattan federal court that centered on drug-fueled and days-long sexual performances, sometimes called “Freak Offs,” between two former girlfriends of the hip-hop mogul and male sex workers.
But jurors acquitted the Bad Boy Records founder on more serious sex trafficking and racketeering charges related to allegedly forcing the two former girlfriends – rhythm and blues singer Casandra Ventura and a woman known in court by the pseudonym Jane – to take part in the encounters while he watched, masturbated and sometimes filmed.
Combs, currently serving his sentence at a low-security federal prison in Fort Dix, New Jersey, was not present at the hearing.
Defense lawyer Alexandra Shapiro argued on Thursday that Subramanian should not have considered evidence that Combs threatened to release an explicit video of Ventura and threatened to cut off rent payments for Jane in deciding on the sentence because that evidence involved the criminal counts rejected by the jury.
“The jury did not authorize punishment for sex trafficking or racketeering conspiracy,” Shapiro said.
Prosecutor Christy Slavik countered that Subramanian was right to consider the threats because they were relevant to the prostitution counts as well.
“Judge Subramanian properly considered the aggravated manner in which the defendant carried out his Mann Act offenses,” Slavik said, referring to the criminal statute that criminalizes transportation across state lines for the purposes of prostitution.
‘JUST A SIDESHOW’
Judge M. Miller Baker, a member of the 2nd Circuit panel, appeared sympathetic toward the defense arguments, noting that prosecutors did not emphasize the Mann Act charges at trial.
“It was just a sideshow,” Baker said.
“Why shouldn’t we hold you to what you argued to the jury?” Baker asked Slavik.
Judges William Nardini and Sarah Merriam, the panel’s two other members, appeared more skeptical of the defense arguments but also asked probing questions of Slavik.
Nardini said the case raises questions that have not yet been considered by any U.S. appeals court.
“This is an exceptionally difficult case,” Nardini said.
Combs has acknowledged abusing his former girlfriends. But he has said incidents of what he called domestic violence were separate from the sexual performances at issue in the case, which he said were consensual.
He is currently due to be released from prison on April 15, 2028, Bureau of Prisons records show.
(Reporting by Luc Cohen in New York; Editing by Noeleen Walder and Will Dunham)
