Danny Masterson has lost his appeal against his 2023 rape conviction but his lawyers plan to take the case to the California Supreme Court.
Danny Masterson has lost his appeal against his 2023 rape conviction.
The That ’70s Show actor was found guilty of two counts of forcible rape after assaulting two women at his home in 2003, but he launched an appeal the following year. Now, a three-judge panel has rejected his arguments and upheld his 30-years-to-life prison sentence.
As part of his appeal, Masterson’s lawyers argued that Judge Charlaine Olmedo, who presided over his trial, was biased against his religion, Scientology, and made a series of remarks that had affected the 50-year-old actor’s First Amendment rights.
A former Scientologist was allowed to testify during the trial as an expert on the church’s beliefs and practices after the prosecution claimed the victims – who were all ex-members of the church – didn’t report the alleged attacks immediately due to a fear of retaliation because of Scientology rules about going to the police.
But the appeals panel ruled on Tuesday (27.10.26) that the judge’s statements showed “no animus or departure from neutrality regarding Scientology”.
They wrote in the ruling: “The jury in this case was not asked to determine the truth or falsity of Scientology doctrine or beliefs.
“Admission of Scientology evidence for those purposes did not contravene the First Amendment.”
The lawyers also argued that the conviction should be reversed because of the 10-year statute of limitations, claiming it “barred defendant’s prosecution for forcible rape”, but the appeals judges insisted it was “inapplicable where, as here, forcible rape offences were committed against more than one victim”.
A request for the case to be overturned due to evidentiary rulings, because Masterson’s request for judicial notice of the Code of Civil Procedure “violated his federal and state constitutional rights to confrontation and due process”, was also denied, as the court found there was no violation of “his federal or state constitutional rights to confrontation and due process”.
The appeals panel denied a separate habeas corpus petition that claimed Masterson didn’t receive an adequate defence, and his appellate attorneys are now planning to appeal the case to the California Supreme Court, as well as continuing to pursue a separate habeas petition.
Masterson’s lawyer Cliff Gardner said: “The appellate court’s decision to deny this appeal and deny the habeas corpus petition ignores the extraordinary new evidence that has been before them for more than a year. That evidence includes statements by both complaining witnesses that their sexual experiences with Danny Masterson were both consensual and positive.
“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.”
His fellow attorney in the case, Eric Multhaup, branded the rulings “fundamentally wrong”.
He added: “The habeas petition contains striking evidence of innocence that was never presented to the jury. For example, long before she claimed forcible rape, one of the complaining witnesses confided in two of her closest friends that her sexual experience with Danny Masterson was her ‘best sex ever’. Now, years later, she has accused him of forcible rape and is suing him for damages.
“The other complaining witness — again, long before she made any claim of forcible rape — had a catch-up conversation with a longtime friend who had also had sex with Danny Masterson, and they compared notes about their respective experiences in a light-hearted and favourable manner. Years later, she too accused him of forcible rape and has joined the civil lawsuit suing him for damages. None of this evidence was presented to the jury. None of it.
“The Court of Appeal did not address any of the exculpatory evidence that was contained in the habeas corpus petition, and instead justified the denial with a one-paragraph summary of the one-sided evidence presented by the prosecution. This cursory treatment reflects poorly on the administration of justice in the Court of Appeal, and will be rectified by a petition to the California Supreme Court.”
Danny Masterson loses appeal against 2023 rape conviction
