The 56-year-old music mogul was found guilty earlier this year on two counts of prostitution-related offenses following an eight-week trial in New York.
The legal team for the American rapper, Sean “Diddy” Combs, has filed an extensive appeal challenging the music icon's conviction and 50-month prison sentence on prostitution-related charges, arguing that the trial court acted unfairly and relied on conduct for which Combs was acquitted.
The 56-year-old music mogul was found guilty earlier this year on two counts of prostitution-related offenses following an eight-week trial in New York.
He was acquitted of more serious charges, including sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy. He is currently serving his sentence at a low-security federal prison in New Jersey.
During the trial, the court heard weeks of testimony from Combs’s former girlfriends and associates, who described alleged abuse and drug-fuelled sexual encounters referred to as “freak-offs” or “hotel nights.”
Prosecutors presented the testimony as part of a broader pattern of misconduct, while Combs’s defence maintained that all sexual activity was consensual.
In an 84-page appeal brief filed on Tuesday, December 23, 2025, Combs’s lawyers argued that the sentencing judge, Arun Subramanian, improperly relied on allegations tied to charges the jury had rejected, according to reports.
The lawyers accused the judge of effectively substituting his own judgment for that of the jury.
“He sits in prison today, serving a 50-month sentence, because the district judge acted as a thirteenth juror,” the filing states.
“The judge defied the jury’s verdict and found Combs ‘coerced,’ ‘exploited,’ and ‘forced’ his girlfriends to have sex and led a criminal conspiracy.”
The legal team noted that Combs was convicted only on “two lesser counts, prostitution offenses that didn’t require force, fraud, or coercion.”
“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 filing reads.
At Combs’s sentencing hearing in October, Judge Subramanian cited the testimony describing abuse and erratic behaviour in imposing a sentence of more than four years.
“A history of good works can't wash away the record in this case. You abused these women. You used that abuse to get your way, freak-offs and hotel nights,” the judge said.
“The evidence of the abuse is massive. The drugs may have exacerbated your erratic and violent behavior over the years. However, the court has to consider all of your history here,” he added.
In the appeal, Combs’s lawyers also argued that his conduct did not meet the legal definition of prostitution.
“Properly construed, paying for a voyeuristic experience, which is what Combs was convicted of doing, is not engaging in ‘prostitution,’” they wrote.
The defence further claimed that the sexual encounters described at trial were constitutionally protected.
“Second, freak-offs and hotel nights were highly choreographed sexual performances involving the use of costumes, role play, and staged lighting, which were filmed so Combs and his girlfriends could watch this amateur pornography later,” the filing stated.
“Pornography production and viewing of this sort is protected by the First Amendment and thus cannot constitutionally be prosecuted,” the lawyers added.
However, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York has not commented on the appeal.