Danny Masterson will continue to serve his 30-years-to-life prison sentence after a court rejected his appeal. According to Us Weekly, a three-judge panel dismissed all arguments presented by the That '70s Show alum in an 89-page ruling issued on Tuesday, October 27.
Masterson was convicted in 2023 of forcibly raping two women at his home in 2003, receiving consecutive sentences of 15 years to life for each count. While jurors failed to reach a verdict on a third charge involving a former girlfriend who accused him of sexual assault in 2001, the appeals panel noted her statements showed no bias regarding Scientology.
The court also rejected arguments regarding the statute of limitations, evidentiary rulings, and a separate habeas corpus petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. Masterson's appellate attorneys, Cliff Gardner and Eric Multhaup, stated Tuesday that they plan to appeal the decision to the California Supreme Court and continue pursuing a separate habeas petition.
The high-profile legal battle has drawn intense media scrutiny since initial allegations surfaced several years ago. Legal experts have closely followed the proceedings due to the involvement of the Church of Scientology, to which Masterson belongs, and its complex intersections with the broader criminal justice system in California.
During the original trial, prosecutors argued that the organization exerted undue influence over victims and witnesses, a claim that defense teams consistently denied. The appellate court's 89-page ruling thoroughly addressed each of these contentious points before upholding the original jury's determination.
Supporters and critics alike have weighed in on the ongoing saga, which has remained a staple of entertainment journalism for over two decades. The actor's removal from the popular television series marked a definitive end to his mainstream career in Hollywood.
As the legal teams prepare for their next steps at the state supreme court level, the focus shifts to whether justices will choose to hear the case. Such petitions face rigorous screening processes, and acceptance is never guaranteed in matters already reviewed by lower appellate bodies.
Meanwhile, victim advocacy groups have praised the judiciary for maintaining the integrity of the original verdicts. They emphasize that the outcome reinforces accountability within high-profile entertainment circles where power dynamics often complicate reporting and prosecution.
The defense maintains that procedural errors during the initial trial compromised a fair outcome for their client. However, the comprehensive rejection by the three-judge panel indicates that appellate magistrates found no constitutional violations significant enough to overturn the conviction.
Public interest in the case remains high as Hollywood continues to navigate accountability and transparency. Further developments in the California Supreme Court will likely unfold over the coming months as legal briefs are filed and reviewed.