Sean “Diddy” Combs sentenced to more than 4 years in prison

 Hip-hop mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs has been handed a 50-month (4 years, 2 months) federal prison sentence after being convicted on two counts of transporting individuals across state lines for prostitution — in connection with “drug-fueled sexual events.” 

Though jury deliberations acquitted him of more serious charges, such as racketeering and sex trafficking, the judge deemed a lengthy punishment necessary given evidence of coercion, abuse, and recurring violence. 

Combs, 55, has already spent about a year in custody, which will count toward the new sentence. 

What Led Here

• In July 2025, a federal jury in New York found Combs guilty on two counts of transporting individuals for prostitution in what prosecutors described as orchestrated “Freak Offs” — sexual encounters involving his girlfriends and male escorts, often recorded.  
• He was acquitted of racketeering and sex trafficking counts, which could have carried life sentences.  
• The prosecution had sought more than 11 years behind bars, citing a pattern of domestic violence, threats, and coercion.  
• The defense asked for 14 months, arguing mitigation based on time already served and claims of drug addiction.  

Courtroom Drama & Reactions

• During sentencing, Combs broke down emotionally, apologized to his victims and family, and said he’d “learned his lesson.”  
• Multiple adult children spoke in court, pleading for leniency and expressing their need for their father.  
• A poignant letter from Cassie Ventura (Combs’ former partner) warned of continued trauma, retaliation fears, and the need for accountability.  
• The judge imposed a $500,000 fine in addition to prison time, and five years of supervised release to follow incarceration.  

What Happens Now

• Because Combs has already served ~12 months in custody, his remaining time in prison will be ~38 months.  
• After prison, he must undergo five years of supervised release.  
• His legal team is expected to appeal, arguing that the sentencing was excessively harsh given the jury’s acquittals and existing contradictions.  
• This case underscores growing legal scrutiny on powerful entertainment figures and the complexities of prosecuting cases involving intimate and coercive abuse.