R. Kelly's appeal denied: Singer might take prison sentence challenge to Supreme Court
Disgraced music superstar R. Kelly was dealt a legal blow on Wednesday after an appeals court in New York denied the singer's challenge to his 30-year-prison sentence and conviction on racketeering and sex trafficking charges.
The U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the R&B singer's original sentence and conviction stemming from a 2021 trial that found him guilty on nine counts of sex trafficking and racketeering. The charges were based on an argument that the entourage of managers and aides who helped Kelly meet girls — and keep them obedient and quiet — amounted to a criminal enterprise.
"We have considered all the arguments presented by Kelly on appeal and concluded they are without merit," the decision reads, according to online court records reviewed by Paste BN.
Last March, Kelly's legal team — zeroing in on the racketeering statute used to convict the singer — launched an appeal to reverse his conviction or, alternatively, grant him a retrial.
In a statement to Paste BN, Kelly's attorney Jennifer Bonjean said she was "disappointed" by the ruling but alluded to a possible appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
"We believe the United States Supreme Court will be interested in reviewing this unprecedented opinion that gives the government limitless discretion to apply the RICO statute to situations absurdly remote from statute's intent," the statement says.
"The statute was intended to punish organized crime — not individual conduct. This decision paves the way for prosecutorial abuse of the RICO statute."
Court: R. Kelly 'exploited' celebrity status to target young women for abuse
Kelly's appeal challenged several aspects of his 2021 conviction, including the evidence supporting his racketeering and Mann Act convictions. In addition to racketeering, Kelly was convicted of criminal counts accusing him of violating the Mann Act, which makes it illegal to take anyone across state lines "for any immoral purpose."
However, the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals maintained that there was "sufficient evidence to support each of Kelly's convictions, including for the state and federal violations underlying his Mann Act convictions."
"Enabled by a constellation of managers, assistants, and other staff for over 25 years, Kelly exploited his fame to lure girls and young women into his grasp," the decision reads. "Evidence at trial showed that he would isolate them from friends and family, control nearly every aspect of their lives, and abuse them verbally, physically, and sexually."
The "I Believe I Can Fly" singer and his legal team also took aim at a group of jurors selected to serve in Kelly's trial, arguing that the four unnamed individuals were biased against Kelly due to their prior knowledge of his case, their media consumption and "opinions on STDs."
The appeals court concluded that the U.S. district court overseeing Kelly's trial conducted an "extensive" review process, which consisted of a 108-question questionnaire as well as in-person questioning.
"The record indicates that each juror was subject to thorough questioning by the district judge during in-person voir dire," the decision reads. "The district court determined, based on that questioning and after giving each side an opportunity to request further questioning, that each juror could be impartial when deciding the case."
Appeals court 'satisfied' with restitution payments to R. Kelly victims
Kelly had also challenged the legitimacy of restitution payments made to two of his victims, who were infected with herpes as a result of their sexual activity with the singer.
In a statement to Paste BN, Bonjean said Kelly's "primary accuser" was awarded a "windfall of nearly $300,000 for a lifetime supply of the brand-name herpes medication Valtrex even though there is no guarantee she would use the money for that purpose."
"The generic version of the drug is a fraction of the price," Bonjean continued. "This was not restitution, this was an effort by the government to financially enrich government witnesses for their testimony."
Kelly's victims, Jane and Stephanie, both allege the singer initiated sexual relationships with them when they were underage. Jane was awarded over $281,000 in restitution for her herpes treatment, while Stephanie received over $70,000.
The "Trapped in the Closet" singer claimed in his appeal that the district court "abused its discretion in ordering restitution" for Jane, in part, because the government allegedly failed to prove the woman would "actually treat her herpes with Valtrex rather than the cheaper generic, valacyclovir."
However, the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals determined that it was "satisfied" with the district court's restitution order for a name-brand drug.
"Covering Jane's costs for a name-brand drug does not give her a windfall," the decision reads. "Jane would not have had to purchase herpes medication if Kelly had not infected her with the virus.
"And like the district court, we are not aware of any authority requiring the victim to 'pursue the cheapest option to minimize a defendant's restitution expenses."
Contributing: Elise Brisco, Paste BN