A panel of federal appeals court judges raised doubts on Thursday about the severity of the approximately four-year prison sentence imposed on Sean “Diddy” Combs for his conviction on prostitution-related charges. The judges, part of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan, refrained from issuing an immediate ruling following a two-hour session of arguments.
Circuit Judge William J. Nardini described the case as “exceptionally difficult,” posing unique questions not only for the court but for federal courts nationwide. Throughout the proceedings, there were concerns raised by the judges regarding whether the sentencing judge improperly factored in elements of charges on which Combs was acquitted. Combs’ attorney, Alexandra Shapiro, contended that he received the longest prison term ever for such charges given his criminal history.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Christy Slavik countered Shapiro’s argument, asserting that the four-year, two-month prison term handed to Combs was below the federal sentencing guidelines and in alignment with similar convictions in the 2nd Circuit. Combs, currently incarcerated in a federal facility in New Jersey, is contesting his conviction and sentence, which saw him found guilty under the Mann Act for transporting individuals across state lines for prostitution, while being acquitted of sex trafficking and racketeering charges that carried a potential life sentence.
During the sentencing in October, Judge Arun Subramanian emphasized that the court considered the offenses Combs was convicted of, not those he was acquitted on, but highlighted the need to evaluate the nature of the offense and the defendant’s characteristics. The judge also pointed out that there are no restrictions on the background, character, and conduct that can be taken into account during sentencing.
Combs, aged 56, has been in custody since his arrest in September 2024 and is slated for release in April 2028, according to the Federal Bureau of Prisons. His legal team is pushing for a reversal of his conviction or a reduced sentence. The court discussions did not touch upon the argument put forth by Combs’ lawyers regarding the First Amendment protecting his sexual encounters, which were sometimes filmed and deemed as “amateur pornography.”
The trial shed light on the private life of the influential music figure, revealing details of violence, drug use, and sexual activities termed as “freak-offs” or “hotel nights.” Despite not taking the stand, Combs was present throughout the trial, with his defense acknowledging the potential for violence while refuting efforts by prosecutors to criminalize his personal life.