Diddy’s Legal Team Questions Severity of 4-Year Prison Sentence in Appellate Court: ‘Exceptionally Difficult Case’

Sean Combs’ lawyers argue that the disgraced music mogul was sentenced to four times the typical punishment for his crimes

Sean Combs at an event in 2018
Sean Combs at an event in 2018. (Credit: Vivien Killilea/Getty Images for CÎROC Vodka)

Federal appeals court judges heard arguments about the severity of disgraced music mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs’ four-year prison sentence, examining whether the term was too extreme.

On Thursday, a three-judge panel for the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan met for two hours to discuss the conviction, per AP News. During that time, legal teams for both the U.S. government and Combs made their cases regarding whether acquitted charges against Combs were improperly considered as part of his sentencing.

Back in October 2025, Combs was sentenced to four years and two months in prison after being found guilty of two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution. Earlier that year, he was acquitted of the most serious alleged crimes: racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking by force, fraud, or coercion involving two women.

Combs’ legal team, which has been trying to overturn his 50-month sentence under the Mann Act for prostitution-related charges, argued that Judge Arun Subramanian, who oversaw his summer trial, should not have considered the alleged abuse in his decision-making. They further argued that Combs was therefore punished for crimes a jury said he was not guilty of, which they say is legally unfair.

“When 12 fellow citizens declare someone ‘not guilty,’ he is not guilty. Period,” Combs legal team stated in their March appeals brief. “‘With an acquittal, the jury as a representative of the community has been asked by the State to authorize punishment … and has refuse to do so.’ That’s what happened here. The jury refused to authorize any punishment for coercive sex or conspiracy — because the evidence showed there was none. The jury only authorized punishment for ‘prostitution.’ It never authorized a sentence four times the typical sentence for that crime. But the district court imposted one anyone.”

However, Assistant U.S. Attorney Christy Slavik stated that Combs’ prison time was below sentencing guidelines and met the standard of similar convictions in the 2nd Circuit.

Since Combs has already served over a year in prison, he’ll likely be released within three years of sentencing. The judge also fined Combs $500,000 and ordered five years of supervised release upon the mogul’s release from prison.

By the end of the arguments, Circuit Judge William J. Nardini called the case “exceptionally difficult” not just for this court but for any federal court in the country.

Comments