AceShowbiz - The legal battle surrounding Sean Diddy Combs continues as his defense team and prosecutors faced intense questioning on Thursday before a panel of three judges from the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York. The hearing focused on Diddy's effort to overturn his 50-month prison sentence and conviction related to prostitution charges.

During the session, Diddy's attorney, Alexandra Shapiro, opened with a statement emphasizing the importance of respecting jury verdicts and maintaining public trust in the justice system. She argued that Manhattan Federal Court Judge Arun Subramanian had imposed an unjustly harsh sentence by factoring in violent conduct for which Diddy was not convicted.

The panel, however, was quick to challenge Shapiro’s position. Judge William Nardini cited prior rulings from the Second Circuit that permit sentencing judges to consider conduct acquitted by juries. "What remedy do you expect this court to provide given established precedent allowing judges to consider such conduct?" he asked sharply.

Nardini also took issue with Shapiro’s phrasing, particularly her use of the expression “make weight” concerning sentencing factors. He described it as "a rather disparaging characterization," prompting Shapiro to clarify her intent immediately. The back-and-forth continued as Nardini questioned whether Shapiro was implying the district court judge failed to exercise independent judgment. Shapiro firmly denied any such suggestion, but the judge pressed her repeatedly on the matter.

Despite the rigorous scrutiny faced by Diddy's defense, the panel directed similar tough questions toward prosecutor Christy Slavik. At one point, a judge remarked on Slavik’s evasiveness after an unsatisfactory answer, stating, "You're very good at evading my question." The appeals judges will now weigh the arguments from both sides before issuing a ruling.

In the original trial, which lasted nine weeks and concluded in July, Diddy was convicted on two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution but acquitted of more serious allegations, including racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking. His defense has consistently disputed the prosecution’s portrayal of his actions, highlighting that encounters described by ex-partners Casandra "Cassie" Ventura and "Jane" were consensual and denying coercion allegations.

Diddy's lawyers argue that since he was acquitted of the more severe charges, Judge Subramanian should not have considered the accusers’ claims of abuse during sentencing. They accused the judge of acting as a “thirteenth juror” by overriding the jury’s verdict and labeling Diddy as having coerced and exploited his former girlfriends. The defense also noted that the sentence handed to Diddy was the longest ever imposed in cases with similar prostitution-related charges, contrasting it with other defendants who operated prostitution rings exploiting vulnerable women.

Before Thursday’s hearing, prosecutors maintained in court documents that they had demonstrated Diddy supplied Ventura and Jane with drugs and engaged in physical violence, including hitting, kicking, and punching, around the times of these encounters. They dismissed claims that the 50-month sentence was excessive as baseless.

Judge Subramanian delivered the sentence on October 3, 2025. Although Diddy faced up to 20 years in prison, the prosecution sought a 135-month term, while the defense requested a much shorter 14-month sentence, which would have largely been considered time served since Diddy had been in custody since his September 16, 2024, arrest.

While Diddy’s charitable efforts were acknowledged during sentencing, Subramanian stressed that the court must consider the full scope of his conduct and history. The judge referenced the allegations of physical, psychological, and financial abuse levied by Ventura and Jane to illustrate the power dynamics Diddy allegedly exploited to control his former partners.

“A history of good works can't wash away the record in this case, which showed that you abused the power and control you had over the lives of women,” Subramanian stated during sentencing. “You abused them.”

He further emphasized the profound impact of the alleged abuse, saying, “This was subjugation, and it drove both Ms. Ventura and Jane to thoughts of ending their lives. That is the reality of what happened.”

As the appeals process moves forward, both the defense and prosecution await the court’s decision, which will determine whether Diddy's sentence will be upheld or reduced. The case continues to draw attention for its complex legal arguments and the high-profile nature of the defendant.