Prosecutors Push to Uphold Sean “Diddy” Combs’ Conviction in Federal Appeal

Federal prosecutors are urging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to reject an appeal filed by music mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs, arguing there is no legal basis to overturn his Mann Act conviction or 50-month federal prison sentence.

The government’s appellate brief, filed ahead of scheduled oral arguments in April 2026, defends both the jury’s verdict and the sentencing decision issued by U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian in the Southern District of New York.

Background: The Mann Act Conviction

In July 2025, a Manhattan federal jury convicted Sean Diddy Combs on two counts of violating the Mann Act, a statute that prohibits transporting individuals across state lines for prostitution. He was acquitted of more serious charges, including racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking.

Prosecutors alleged that Sean Diddy Combs arranged and financed interstate travel for women and male escorts to participate in drug-fueled sexual encounters. According to trial testimony, staff members allegedly coordinated flights, hotels, and payments connected to the encounters.

In October 2025, Judge Subramanian sentenced Diddy to 50 months in prison, five years of supervised release, and a $500,000 fine. He is currently serving his sentence at FCI Fort Dix in New Jersey.

Defense Argument: “13th Juror” and Acquitted Conduct

Diddy’s legal team has mounted a two-pronged appeal: challenging both the conviction itself and the length of the sentence.

Defense attorneys argue that the trial judge improperly acted as a “13th juror” by factoring in evidence related to charges for which Sean Diddy Combs was acquitted. Specifically, they contend the court relied on testimony involving alleged coercion and misconduct that did not result in convictions.

They also argue that applying the Mann Act in this case infringes upon constitutional protections, claiming the encounters were filmed as amateur adult content and therefore fall within First Amendment protections.

Prosecutors Cite Supreme Court Precedent

In response, federal prosecutors assert that long-standing Supreme Court precedent permits sentencing judges to consider so-called “acquitted conduct” when determining appropriate punishment.

In their filing, government attorneys argue that sentencing courts are allowed to evaluate the broader context of a defendant’s actions, even if certain counts did not result in a conviction. They maintain that Judge Subramanian properly calculated federal sentencing guidelines and exercised lawful discretion.

Prosecutors also dismissed the First Amendment claim, stating that filming or watching sexual encounters does not shield interstate transportation for prostitution from criminal liability.

Legal analysts note that appellate courts rarely overturn sentencing decisions unless clear procedural errors or constitutional violations are demonstrated.

What Happens Next?

Oral arguments are scheduled for April 9, 2026, at the Second Circuit courthouse in Manhattan. Each side will have a limited time to present arguments before a three-judge panel.

The court could affirm the conviction, overturn it, reduce the sentence, or remand the case for further proceedings. If the Second Circuit rules against Combs, his remaining option would be to petition the U.S. Supreme Court for review — a request granted in only a small percentage of cases.

Broader Implications for Federal Sentencing

The appeal is being closely watched not only because of Combs’ celebrity status but also due to its potential implications for federal sentencing practices. The case touches on ongoing debates about judicial discretion, acquitted conduct guidelines, and the scope of the Mann Act in modern prosecutions.

For now, prosecutors maintain that both the conviction and sentence should stand, arguing that the trial court acted within established legal boundaries.

A ruling from the Second Circuit is expected later in 2026.