TRUE CRIME NEWSDanny Masterson Loses Appeal on Rape Conviction as Actor Continues 30-Year Sentence

Danny Masterson lost his appeal of his rape conviction.
Oct. 28 2026, Published 4:07 a.m. ET
Danny Masterson has lost his appeal of his rape conviction.
According to the latest court ruling, a three-judge panel denied his attempt to overturn his 2023 conviction, rejecting each of his arguments for appeal.
Per the ruling, the judges confirmed his 30-year-to-life prison sentence.
Danny Masterson's 2023 Rape Conviction

Danny Masterson was found guilty of raping two women at his home in 2003.
In spring 2023, Masterson was found guilty of raping two women at his home in 2003.
However, the jurors couldn't reach a verdict on the third count involving the TV star's former girlfriend, who claimed that she was sexually assaulted by Masterson in 2001.
Ultimately, after being declared guilty of two counts of forcible rape, Masterson was sentenced to two consecutive sentences of 15 years to life on each.
In his latest appeal, though, the actor's attorneys argued that the trial judge, Judge Charlaine Olmedo, was biased against the accused's religion, Scientology.
Masterson's Lawyers' Arguments

Danny Masterson was sentenced to two consecutive sentences of 15 years to life on each.
The lawyers argued that the respective judge made a series of remarks during trial about the religion that allegedly affected his First Amendment rights.
During the trial as well, Olmedo allowed a former Scientologist to testify as an expert on the church’s beliefs and practices.
However, in its latest decision, the judges' panel found that the judge’s statements showed “no animus or departure from neutrality regarding Scientology.”
“The jury in this case was not asked to determine the truth or falsity of Scientology doctrine or beliefs,” the appeals court wrote. “Admission of Scientology evidence for those purposes did not contravene the First Amendment.”
- Danny Masterson Appeals Rape Conviction as Actor Claims His Right to a 'Fair Trial' Was 'Violated' Amid Life-Long Prison Sentence
- Danny Masterson Denied Bail Amid Rape Conviction Appeal as Judge Believes He Has 'Every Incentive to Flee' With 'No Wife to Go Home To'
- Danny Masterson Seeks to Overturn Rape Conviction as He Blames His Lawyer for Poor Defense
Want OK! each day? Sign up here!
Judges Denied Masterson's Requests

Danny Masterson's attorneys argued that the trial judge, Judge Charlaine Olmedo, was biased against the accused's religion, Scientology.
Masterson's lawyers also asked for his conviction to be reversed on the 10-year statute of limitations period, claiming it “barred defendant’s prosecution for forcible rape.”
The legal team also argued for the case to be overturned due to evidentiary rulings, claiming their client’s request for judicial notice of the Code of Civil Procedure “violated his federal and state constitutional rights to confrontation and due process.”
However, the judges denied both of these claims.
The appeals court denied the 10-year statute of limitations period claim, stating it was “inapplicable where, as here, forcible rape offenses were committed against more than one victim.”
Masterson's Legal Team's Future Plans

Danny Masterson's lawyers also asked for his conviction to be reversed on the 10-year statute of limitations period.
The panel also denied Masterson's second request, ruling that it was not a violation of “his federal or state constitutional rights to confrontation and due process.”
The appeals court argued against the trial court’s decision to exclude certain evidence concerning the possible effect on the victims’ pending civil action, saying it “did not preclude defendant from presenting evidence of the victims’ possible financial motives as a basis for challenging their credibility.”
The judges also turned down a separate habeas corpus petition claiming Masterson didn’t get an adequate defense.
But the actor's legal team isn't giving up, as his appellate attorneys, Cliff Gardner and Eric Multhaup, shared their plans to appeal his case to the California Supreme Court and continue pursuing a separate habeas petition.


