A federal appeals panel heard oral arguments April 9 in the appeal of Sean "Diddy" Combs, who is challenging a 50-month prison sentence imposed after his conviction on federal charges [1]. Combs' attorneys contend that U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian improperly relied on conduct tied to sex trafficking and racketeering counts for which a jury acquitted Combs when calculating the sentence [1]. Defense attorney Alexandra Shapiro argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that the jury "did not authorize punishment for sex trafficking or conspiracy" [1]. A three-judge panel appeared skeptical of arguments from both sides [1].
The acquitted-conduct issue sits at the intersection of long-contested sentencing doctrine and recent Sentencing Commission action. Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, judges have historically possessed broad discretion to consider relevant conduct, including conduct underlying charges that resulted in acquittal, when fashioning a sentence. The Sentencing Commission amended its guidelines in 2023 to restrict that practice, and federal courts have since divided over how far those amendments reach and whether they survive constitutional scrutiny. The underlying prosecution, brought by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, secured Combs' conviction on counts that stopped short of the full charging indictment [1].
Prosecutors urged the Second Circuit to affirm the sentence, pointing to a statement Judge Subramanian made on the record indicating he would have imposed the same 50-month term regardless of whether the acquitted-conduct evidence was considered [1]. That alternative-basis argument is a standard government tool in sentencing appeals, and its persuasiveness turns on whether the appellate court credits the district court's stated reasoning as sufficiently independent of the disputed evidence. The panel's pointed questioning of both Shapiro and the government suggests no clear consensus emerged at argument [1].
The outcome will carry weight beyond the Combs case. A ruling that bars reliance on acquitted conduct would align the Second Circuit with the Sentencing Commission's reform posture and could require resentencing in a substantial number of pending and recently decided federal cases across the circuit. Conversely, a ruling upholding the sentence would deepen a circuit split that could eventually compel Supreme Court review. No decision date has been set, and the panel is not bound by any timeline for issuing its opinion [1].