What is an Allen charge? Diddy trial may see rare legal move

Diddy trial: Criminal defense attorney on partial verdict reached

FOX 5 NY's Lisa Evers speaks with criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor Seth Zuckerman about the partial verdict reached by the jury in the Sean "Diddy" Combs federal trial.

NEW YORK - Jurors in Sean "Diddy" Combs’ federal sex trafficking trial told the judge Tuesday that they’ve hit an impasse on the most serious charge: racketeering conspiracy. While they’ve reached verdicts on four other counts, their note cited "unpersuadable views" on both sides of Count 1, prompting the court to consider issuing what’s known as an Allen charge.

The instruction—used in federal court when juries struggle to reach consensus—encourages continued deliberations and reminds jurors of their duty to work toward a unanimous verdict. But Diddy’s defense team is urging the court to hold off, saying the jury appears to be working diligently through a high volume of testimony and evidence and doesn’t need added pressure.

If jurors are ultimately unable to reach a decision on the racketeering charge, it could result in a mistrial for that count—though verdicts on the four other charges would still stand.

Why is the judge considering an Allen charge?

The backstory:

On day two of deliberations, Judge Arun Subramanian received a note from jurors indicating they were split on Count 1 — racketeering conspiracy. 

FILE – Sean "Diddy" Combs attends a black-tie event at the Fox Theatre in Atlanta on June 2, 2021. Combs is currently on trial in New York facing federal sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy charges. (Photo by Paras Griffin/Getty Images)

The note described "unpersuadable views" among members of the panel, a legal signal that often triggers consideration of an Allen charge. Prosecutors supported the idea of delivering a modified version of the charge, while the defense pushed back, warning against undue influence.

What we know:

Allen charges are permitted in federal court and have been used in high-profile cases to prevent mistrials. Here’s what’s clear so far about how this might play out in the Diddy trial:

• The Allen charge is a tool used by federal judges when jurors are struggling to reach a unanimous verdict.
• It stems from the 1896 Supreme Court case Allen v. United States, which upheld its use.
• The instruction reminds jurors to re-examine their positions and continue deliberating in good faith.

What we don't know:

While the jury’s note signals a split, many details remain uncertain about what comes next. Here are the open questions as deliberations continue:

• Judge Subramanian has not yet confirmed whether he will issue the Allen charge or in what form.
• It’s unclear how close the jury is to agreement or which side holds the majority on Count 1.
• The exact timing for resuming deliberations on that count has not been made public.

Why you should care:

Count 1 — racketeering conspiracy — is the linchpin of the government’s case, carrying the possibility of a life sentence. 

If the jury remains split, a mistrial on that count could complicate any future prosecution, even if verdicts are reached on the other charges. The use of an Allen charge could also become a flashpoint if Diddy is ultimately convicted, possibly cited in appeals.

When have Allen charges been used before?

Dig deeper:

Allen charges have surfaced in several recent high-profile trials—including one in New York just months ago.

During the Daniel Penny trial in December 2024, a Manhattan judge issued an Allen charge after jurors said they couldn’t reach a decision on second-degree manslaughter. In that case, the judge ultimately dismissed the manslaughter charge but instructed jurors to continue deliberating on a lesser count.

The move was controversial but legal under New York state law, which—like federal law—requires unanimous verdicts. The Allen charge has historically been used to avoid mistrials by encouraging consensus, but critics argue it can pressure jurors to cave rather than hold their ground.