Click here to read the full article.
An appeals court on Friday rejected Harvey Weinstein’s bid to overturn his rape conviction in Los Angeles, but ordered a lower court judge to resentence him.
Weinstein, 74, was convicted in 2022 of sexually assaulting
a model at the L.A.-Italia Film Festival, and sentenced to 16 years in prison. On appeal, his lawyers argued that the trial judge improperly withheld sexually suggestive Facebook messages between the accuser and another man that would have undermined her credibility and helped to establish an alibi.
In its ruling on Friday, the three-judge panel ruled that Weinstein’s trial attorneys had failed to adhere to the state’s rape shield law, which protects sex assault accusers from defense questions about past sexual conduct. The appeals panel similarly also found that the trial court’s evidentiary rulings were not grounds to overturn the verdict.
“The court’s application of California statutory rules of evidence did not infringe on Weinstein’s constitutional rights to challenge the prosecution’s case, present a defense, and confront the witnesses against him,” wrote Justice Michelle Kim, on behalf of a unanimous panel.
The appellate panel rejected a series of other arguments as well, including a claim that the judge erred by allowing four accusers to testify about uncharged allegations of sexual misconduct. The court found that the testimony “was relevant to show his propensity to commit the sexual offenses charged in this case.”
The appeals court did order that Weinstein be resentenced. Weinstein was sentenced to eight years for forcible oral copulation — the highest available sentence on that count — plus six years for forcible sexual penetration and two years for forcible rape. Judge Lisa Lench found that the eight-year sentence was justified due to Weinstein’s prior sexual assault conviction in New York.
Since then, however, Weinstein’s New York verdict was overturned, removing that as a justification for the higher term. The appeals court noted that the state attorney general’s office agreed that Weinstein was entitled to resentencing on those grounds, and ordered the lower court to do so.
If Lench imposes the middle term for that offense — six years — it would reduce his total sentence by two years.
Weinstein’s spokesman, Juda Engelmayer, said that he was “disappointed” in the ruling and would pursue an appeal to the state’s highest court.
“This is not the end of the appellate process,” he said. “We intend to seek review in the California Supreme Court because we continue to believe significant legal errors affected the proceedings and warrant further review.”
Weinstein also faces sentencing in September in his New York case, after being reconvicted last year of sexually assaulting Miriam Haley.
