Danny Masterson’s 2023 rape conviction survives appeal

By Elena Vasquez

What did the appeals panel uphold?

An appeals court denied Danny Masterson’s appeal of his 2023 rape conviction, leaving his 30-year prison sentence in place.

In an 89-page ruling, a three-judge panel rejected each argument advanced by Masterson’s lawyers. The panel upheld the verdict and sentence.

The panel’s ruling recounted that Masterson, a star of “That 70s Show,” was found guilty of raping two women at his Hollywood Hills home in 2003, while jurors could not decide a separate count. The third count involved a former girlfriend who alleged she was raped in 2001.

The 89-page decision addressed four legal challenges: alleged judicial bias, the statute of limitations, evidentiary rulings and the adequacy of Masterson’s defense. The panel rejected them at this stage.

Masterson remains convicted and sentenced to 30 years in prison.

Why did the court reject the Scientology claim?

One argument alleged that trial judge Charlaine Olmedo had shown bias against Scientology through a series of remarks and adverse rulings. On appeal, his attorneys argued that those actions infringed Masterson’s First Amendment rights.

The panel found that Olmedo’s statements showed “no animus or departure from neutrality regarding Scientology.”

Olmedo allowed a former Scientologist to testify at trial as an expert on the church’s beliefs and practices. The prosecution argued that the victims, all of whom belonged to Scientology and had since left, delayed reporting the incidents or classifying them as rape because they feared retaliation for violating a rule against going to the police.

Masterson’s lawyers objected to that evidence during the trial. On appeal, they argued that the court improperly intruded into church doctrine.

The appeals court stated: “The jury in this case was not asked to determine the truth or falsity of Scientology doctrine or beliefs.” It added: “Admission of Scientology evidence for those purposes did not contravene the First Amendment.”

The panel treated the evidence’s stated purpose and the allegation of judicial bias as separate issues. It rejected Masterson’s First Amendment argument on both grounds.

The panel found no anti-Scientology bias and upheld the admission of Scientology evidence for specific purposes.

What happens after the ruling?

The panel also rejected separate arguments about the statute of limitations and evidentiary rulings. It summarily denied a separate habeas corpus petition that argued Masterson had not received an adequate defense.

Cliff Gardner and Eric Multhaup, Masterson’s appellate attorneys, said in a statement that they will appeal to the California Supreme Court. They said they are also pursuing a separate habeas petition.

Gardner disputed the decision in the statement. “Danny is serving a life sentence for crimes he did not commit,” Gardner said. “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.”

The panel’s decision leaves a 30-year sentence in place, although Gardner described Masterson as serving a life sentence.

The conviction remains in force as his lawyers pursue a California Supreme Court appeal and a separate habeas petition.