Danny Masterson’s attempt to overturn his 2023 rape convictions and subsequent 30-year prison sentence was denied on Tuesday by a California appeals court. The decision has prompted the actor’s legal team to announce plans to seek a review from the state’s highest court.
Judicial Ruling
The appellate court released a detailed 89-page ruling, which was acquired by Rolling Stone. In their findings, a panel of three justices dismissed Masterson’s claims that the trial judge mishandled evidence, compromised his right to a fair trial, and displayed bias against Scientology. Masterson had argued that the judge’s comments comparing Scientology to groups such as white supremacists and gangs illustrated bias; however, the justices found no evidence of animosity towards the organization. They remarked, “All of these statements, viewed in context, evidence no animosity toward Scientology.”
Interestingly, during pre-trial proceedings, Masterson himself had requested the court to limit references to Scientology, arguing that the public’s perception of the organization was largely negative. The trial judge noted that evidence related to Scientology could not be considered more inflammatory than information about other groups known for negative associations, such as street gangs or prison gangs.
Trial Details and Conviction
Masterson, known for his role in That ’70s Show and a prominent Scientologist, was charged in 2020 with raping three women at different times in the early 2000s. After an initial trial resulted in a hung jury, a subsequent trial in May 2023 concluded with a conviction, with jurors finding that he had raped two of the accusers. Throughout both trials, the women testified that Masterson had drugged them before the assaults and described alleged efforts by Church of Scientology officials to protect him.
Legal Path Forward
Following his conviction, Masterson filed a direct appeal and later submitted a separate habeas petition, alleging that his previous lead attorney had not provided an adequate defense during the retrial. However, the appellate court rejected both the appeal and the habeas corpus petition. In their ruling, the justices stated that Masterson had failed to demonstrate any abuse of discretion or violation of the First Amendment by the trial court.
Masterson’s legal representatives plan to escalate the matter to the California Supreme Court while also pursuing further habeas corpus relief. They assert that evidence deemed “exculpatory” was not presented during the trial, specifically suggesting that the two women whose allegations led to the convictions had told acquaintances that their interactions with Masterson were consensual. The appellate justices, however, concluded that this evidence would not have altered the trial’s outcome.
Statements from the Defense
Lead appellate attorney Cliff Gardner expressed frustration with the court’s decision, stating, “Danny is serving a life sentence for crimes he did not commit. No one in California, not defendants and not victims who have actually been the victim of a sex crime, is safer by virtue of today’s unfortunate decision.” Meanwhile, Eric Multhaup, the attorney heading Masterson’s habeas corpus challenge, dismissed the ruling as “fundamentally wrong,” claiming the appellate panel had inadequately addressed the evidence put forth by the prosecution.
Multhaup criticized the ruling’s brevity, asserting that it undermined the integrity of the judicial process in the Court of Appeal and proclaimed intentions to rectify this through a petition to the California Supreme Court.
