Experts Say Judge Has Wide Latitude in Sentencing Sean Combs

New York Times

02-07-2025

Though Sean Combs was acquitted on Wednesday of the most serious charges in his federal trial, he still faces the possibility of prison time because the jury found him guilty of two counts of transporting people to engage in prostitution.
Sentencing experts say it is difficult to predict how severe his punishment will be, as the judge in the case must go through complicated calculus to determine a just outcome.
A sentencing date has not yet been set. Each of the two transportation for prostitution convictions carries up to 10 years in prison, creating a maximum of 20 years if those sentences are served consecutively. But there are several reasons to think Mr. Combs's sentence could be considerably shorter than that, experts said.
'Judges almost never come close to' the maximum sentences, said Daniel Richman, a professor at Columbia Law School and a former federal prosecutor in the U.S. attorney's office for the Southern District of New York.
The judge in the trial, Arun Subramanian, will likely start by considering federal sentencing guidelines, rubrics which are used to create a penalty range based on various factors, including the nature of the offense, specifics of the case and personal characteristics of the defendant, like criminal history.
Nationally, judges stuck to the sentencing guidelines in 67 percent of cases in the fiscal year 2024. But judges in the Southern District of New York imposed sentences within the guidelines just 34.5 percent of the time, almost always imposing shorter sentences than the guidelines suggested.
Mr. Richman said the judge has wide latitude to consider what a reasonable sentence would be.
'When making that decision he can consider the guidelines, especially since he just calculated them, but he can consider many other things and need not follow the guidelines,' he said.
Douglas Berman, a sentencing expert at Ohio State University, said that even if judges do not stick to sentencing guidelines, they are often still used as a benchmark. Judges generally don't want to stray too far from established norms, he said.
Mr. Berman said every aspect of the defendant's character and history — his charity work, his professional success, his threat to others, any bad behavior — can be taken into account.
'There really are no limits to what the judge can consider,' he said.
That also extends to evidence presented at trial regarding the counts on which Mr. Combs was acquitted, if the judge deems it relevant to the sentencing. Judges must weigh, among other things, whether the defendant is likely to commit a crime again.
In the courtroom on Wednesday, Mr. Combs appeared to treat the verdict as a victory, pumping his fist in celebration and thanking jurors. Mr. Berman said that 'how much of a win will really turn on how aggressive prosecutors are in their sentencing recommendations,' which he said can often influence judges.