NEW YORK — A federal appeals court in New York weighed arguments Thursday over whether the 50-month prison term handed down to Sean “Diddy” Combs for his conviction on prostitution offenses was overly harsh and wrongly influenced by conduct he wasn’t found guilty of.

The three-judge panel at the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals sharply questioned lawyers for Combs and the Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office over the question of whether coercive and abusive behavior core to crimes Combs was acquitted of should have factored in the trial court judge’s sentence.

Calling the case “exceptionally difficult” at the conclusion of the proceeding, Judge William Nardini said the panel would reserve its decision. He said the appeal presented “a question of first impression, not only for this court but apparently for any federal court of appeals in the country.”

The disgraced mogul once known as “Puff Daddy” was convicted July 2 of two Mann Act violations, with a jury finding he transported commercial sex workers and his exes, Casandra “Cassie” Ventura and a woman who testified under the pseudonym “Jane,” across state lines between 2009 and 2024 to participate in barbaric, dayslong sex parties that he dubbed “freak offs.”

The jury acquitted Combs, 56, of the more serious sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy charges, which could have sent him to prison for life. He is serving out his term at a low-security prison in New Jersey. Combs is also facing dozens of lawsuits brought by men and women accusing him of sexual misconduct, allegations he denies.

Among various positions, Combs’ lawyers have argued that he was overly punished, claiming no other defendant with a minimal criminal history comparable to that of Combs’ had ever been sentenced to as many years as he was for violating the Mann Act.

In sentencing the disgraced co-founder of Bad Boy Records to just over four years in October, Manhattan Federal Judge Arun Subramanian said his sentence was informed by the heinous nature of Combs’ behavior and his character that was evinced at trial.

“You abused the power and control that you had over the lives of women you professed to love dearly,” he said.

Subramanian, who also imposed a $500,000 fine at sentencing, said evidence that the freak offs women were transported to were abusive in nature was “massive.”

“This was subjugation, and it drove both Ms. Ventura and Jane to thoughts of ending their lives,” the judge said at the proceeding. “That is the reality of what happened.”

On Thursday, Combs’ attorney, Alexandra Shapiro, argued for the term to be reduced.

She argued, in part, that circumstances referenced by the judge like coercion shouldn’t have been considered to enhance the sentence because that was one of the elements underlying the sex trafficking charge the jury found Combs not guilty of.

“We are arguing that the acquittals show that the jury didn’t believe the two women were victims,” Shapiro said.

Judge Miller Baker pushed back on Shapiro’s argument.

“Am I correct in understanding that we have this factual finding that we have two women, who were plied with drugs to participate in this, and one of them became an opioid addict?” the judge asked. “Doesn’t that support the reasonableness of this?”

Arguing for the government, Assistant U.S. Attorney Christy Slavik rejected the idea that Combs was unduly punished for the Mann Act violations, saying his sentence was comparable to that imposed against similarly situated defendants.

The prosecutor also said the judge appropriately used his discretion to consider overlapping conduct, in line with guidelines set forth by the Sentencing Commission. She said that just because the jury found Combs didn’t coerce women for the purposes of trafficking them for sex didn’t mean the judge should disregard evidence of coercion in his transporting them for sex.

Slavik said even putting aside the question of acquitted conduct, the history and characteristics of Combs that the judge took into account were not in dispute, with Combs’ defense team acknowledging his history of “horrific domestic abuse,” supplying drugs at freak-offs, and other bad behavior in their opening statement.

The lawyers had argued that a history of assaulting women didn’t make Combs guilty of the crimes charged.

Likening the prosecution’s eight-week case to a pizza, Slavik said the judge’s sentence was based on a slice of conduct.

“In considering the guidelines, he’s not considering that whole pizza pie, he’s considering a slice, and what’s in that slice, it’s what tends to prove the Mann Act,” Slavik said.

“When he looks at the two specific incidents of coercion, those incidents are specifically tied to transportation, they’re specifically tied to the Mann Act.”

Combs’ arguments for overturning his conviction took up little to no time Thursday.

In court filings, his attorneys have maintained that he didn’t pay commercial escorts flown to freak-offs for sex, but for their time, and that the freak-offs were a creative endeavor to make amateur, free-speech-protected porn.

“Combs masturbated and sometimes sexually participated during freak-offs and Hotel Nights, ‘suggesting that the purpose was his immediate sexual gratification,’” prosecutors wrote in their opposition.

“This case is thus far afield from the pornographer state cases on which Combs relies.”

________

©2026 New York Daily News. Visit at nydailynews.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.