Sean “Diddy” Combs has challenged attorney Tony Buzbee’s eligibility to represent multiple sexual assault accusers in federal court, citing alleged misconduct.
On Tuesday, February 25, Diddy’s legal team filed a memorandum in a New York federal court opposing Buzbee’s motion for admission pro hac vice—a request that would allow the Texas-based lawyer to practice in the district despite not being licensed there.
The memo, authored by Diddy’s attorneys Mark Cuccaro, Erica A. Wolff, and Michael Tremonte, emphasized the rarity of their opposition, stating, “We have never opposed a pro hac vice application, and we do not do so lightly here.” However, they argued that Buzbee’s “egregious misconduct” necessitated their objection.
Their primary argument is that Buzbee filed nearly two dozen civil suits against Diddy in New York’s Southern District before obtaining permission to practice in the jurisdiction. Additionally, they claim Buzbee violated New York’s Rules of Professional Conduct by making public statements—such as those on The Chris Hansen Show—in which he allegedly insisted on Diddy’s guilt regarding criminal charges.
Furthermore, they accuse Buzbee of making “deliberately misleading” statements about his ability to practice in New York. While he is licensed to practice in New York state, they argue that his authorization does not extend to federal court in the district.
Diddy Challenges Federal Raids on His Properties
Meanwhile, Diddy is also contesting the legality of recent federal raids on his Miami and Los Angeles properties.
In a motion filed on Sunday, February 23, his legal team argued that the warrants used to carry out the searches were overly broad and unconstitutional. The filing contends that investigators secured access to his iCloud account, mobile devices, and a hotel room under “a grossly distorted picture of reality,” omitting crucial evidence that could have been favorable to him.
“The government got its warrants, leaked damaging information, and then executed its military-style raids at Combs’s residences,” the motion states. “Rather than giving the reviewing magistrate a fair summary, the government hid exculpatory evidence to bolster its case.”
Diddy’s attorneys further claim that prosecutors engaged in “systemic deception” to obtain the warrants, relying on allegations from an individual referred to as “Producer-1,” whom they argue was never a credible source. They also allege that “Producer-1” is not expected to testify against Diddy in his upcoming sex trafficking trial.
Additionally, the filing reiterates Diddy’s long-standing defense that “Victim-1,” identified as his ex-girlfriend Cassie, was a willing participant in all sexual activities.
Diddy is seeking either the suppression of all evidence obtained from the raids or a hearing to scrutinize the government’s process in securing the warrants.
