Diddy's lawyers say his sentence is based on stuff he was cleared of. The rapper, Sean Combs, got a fifty-month sentence for two Mann Act violations but was acquitted on bigger charges like racketeering. His new appeal argues Judge Arun Subramanian used that acquitted conduct, including the 2016 assault on Cassie Ventura, to unfairly lengthen the sentence. His attorney, Alexandra Shapiro, filed the appeal claiming constitutional rights were violated.
Legal commentator Mark Geragos supports this, calling the prosecution's strategy overzealous. He stated the government should be penalized for overcharging. Geragos noted Diddy beat the counts that carried a life sentence, only to have the same dismissed allegations increase his punishment. The defense claims the judge acted like a thirteenth juror, second-guessing the acquittals.
The appeal demands immediate release or a reduced sentence. It points out that the term given is nearly triple the guideline for his actual convictions. The legal team's argument hinges on the fundamental unfairness of enhancing a sentence based on conduct a jury rejected. They believe this gives the appeal a real chance to succeed.
Legal commentator Mark Geragos supports this, calling the prosecution's strategy overzealous. He stated the government should be penalized for overcharging. Geragos noted Diddy beat the counts that carried a life sentence, only to have the same dismissed allegations increase his punishment. The defense claims the judge acted like a thirteenth juror, second-guessing the acquittals.
The appeal demands immediate release or a reduced sentence. It points out that the term given is nearly triple the guideline for his actual convictions. The legal team's argument hinges on the fundamental unfairness of enhancing a sentence based on conduct a jury rejected. They believe this gives the appeal a real chance to succeed.
