A federal judge on Tuesday rejected Sean “Diddy” Combs’ motion for a new trial or acquittal, clearing the way for his upcoming sentencing. U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian ruled that prosecutors had presented “overwhelming evidence of Combs’ guilt.”
Combs was convicted in July of two counts of transporting individuals across state lines for prostitution, though he was acquitted on more serious charges including racketeering and sex trafficking. The judge found that evidence admitted at trial did not unfairly taint the convictions.
“The government proved its case many times over,” Subramanian wrote in his decision. The judge also dismissed the defense’s arguments challenging the application of the Mann Act statute under which Combs was charged.
The ruling comes just days before Combs’ sentencing, currently scheduled for October 3.
Prosecutors push for long sentence
Federal prosecutors have asked the court to impose a sentence of 11 years and three months (135 months) for the rapper. They describe Combs as “unrepentant,” citing testimony from accusers and internal communications.
In contrast, Combs’ defense team is seeking a dramatically lower sentence — no more than 14 months. If that is granted, much of that could be credited to time already served in detention.
Combs has been detained at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn since his arrest in September 2024. His defense has repeatedly argued that his conditions are harsh and his detention has already penalized him.
Cassie Ventura, Combs’ former partner and a key trial witness, submitted a letter urging the court to consider the lasting harm to victims if a light sentence is imposed. Prosecutors also warned of threats to witness safety and the enduring power Combs held over his alleged victims.
Legal analysts say the judge’s decision to deny a new trial underscores the strength of the government’s case. The ruling leaves little remaining avenue for Combs to avoid what could be a substantial prison term.
As sentencing approaches, the court and public will see whether Subramanian opts to lean toward the prosecutors’ call for strict punishment or gives weight to arguments of rehabilitation and credited time already served.