Tory Lanez's Appeal To Enter New Evidence In Megan The Stallion Case Denied
By Tony M. Centeno
August 14, 2025
A three-justice panel from the Second District Court of Appeal has ruled on Tory Lanez's attempt to submit new alleged evidence in his mission to overturn his convictions in the Megan Thee Stallion shooting case.
On Tuesday, August 12, Justices Lee Smalley Edmon, Anne H. Egerton, and Rashida A. Adams denied two habeas corpus petitions filed by the artist's attorneys. Legal journalist Meghann Cuniff reports the petitions requested an evidentiary hearing or a new sentencing based on evidence that wasn't included in his 2022 trial. The evidence includes statements from Tory Lanez's driver, Jauquan Smith, who was not called to testify during the trial, and a recent account from Kelsey Harris' bodyguard.
Full order rejecting Tory Lanez's habeas petitions in his appeal for shooting Megan Thee Stallion:
— Meghann Cuniff (@meghanncuniff) August 13, 2025
“Accordingly, even assuming the facts alleged in the petition are
true, petitioner falls to allege facts establishing a prima facie case
for habeas relief.”https://t.co/c1F8OZGrPE pic.twitter.com/XCASS2Nd9D
The petitions, which were filed in 2023 and 2024, sought to discredit the jury's verdict, citing evidence that wasn't presented during the trial and other issues. Lanez, born Daystar Peterson, and his lawyers asserted they had an affidavit in which Smith alleged he saw the gun in Harris' hands before the shooting in July 2020. Smith maintained he didn't see who actually fired the gun, but Lanez's attorneys believed his statements were enough to support the defense's argument that Harris shot the "Body" rapper. Their petition also mentions new statements from Harris' bodyguard Bradie James, who said he overheard Harris say she shot Meg.
In their ruling, the Justices determined the claims Lanez made in his petitions didn't qualify for habeas relief. They ruled that Smith's statements are "inadmissible" and reiterated that the crooner and his lawyers “affirmatively decided not to call Mr. Smith as a witness at trial.” The justices also questioned why James' statements, which were taken in August 2024, weren't submitted until July 2025.
“To the extent petitioner asserts the James Affidavit constitutes new evidence, the petition is untimely, and petitioner fails to explain and justify the significant delay in seeking habeas corpus relief on this basis,” the justices wrote. “Petitioner has not alleged facts establishing an exception to the rule requiring all claims to be raised in one timely filed petition.”
While the justices have ruled on Lanez's two writ of habeas corpus petitions, the artist's other appeal request, which focuses on what trial jurors heard during his trial, is still pending. Oral arguments on that aspect of the appeal are set for Monday, August 18. Lanez currently serving his 10-year sentence at the California Men’s Colony prison in San Luis Obispo. He was moved there after he was stabbed 14 times by another inmate at California Correctional Institution in Tehachapi last May.