Tory Lanez‘s sentencing in the shooting of Grammy-award winning rapper Megan Thee Stallion has been delayed as the singer’s legal team is seeking a new trial.
Since January, Lanez has hired new attorneys which has resulted in delays when it comes to deciding how much he will serve of the possible 22 years he currently faces. He could also face deportation to Canada once released.
NBC News reported that, according to Deputy Los Angeles County District Attorney Alexander Bott
, Lanez’s legal team wants to raise new issues. Another court date was scheduled for next week.The case stems from an altercation between Lanez, real name Daystar Peterson, and Meg Thee Stallion, real name Megan Pete, in which the former fired shots at the latter following an argument that occurred after a party in Los Angeles.
Megan Thee Stallion would go to great lengths to avoid having to name Lanez
as her attacker before identifying him as a result of ongoing discourse. What followed was over three years of debates, investigation, and a highly covered trial.“I couldn’t walk for a while,” Megan Thee Stallion testified. “I still have nerve damage. I can’t really feel the side of my left foot. The back of my feet are always sore, but I just push through it.” Lanez did not testify on his own behalf, though he did release an album refuting her claims.
Lanez’s new attorney, Matthew Barhoma, now claims that erroneous evidence was entered into the original trial including forensic testing that “raises concerns,” Instagram posts that were submitted late into evidence as well as prejudicial photos of Lanez’s gun tattoo.
The prosecutor’s office filed a response to the appeal last week, stating that the motion lacked substance and that the guilty verdict should stand. Included its response was a statement from Lanez’s former attorney, Shawn Holley, who oversaw his defense before withdrawing from his legal team amid rumors of a bribery attempt on Kelsey Harris, a key witness and the former best friend of Meg Thee Stallion.
“The evidence presented at trial was properly admitted, and the defendant’s claims of errors and violations of his constitutional rights are without merit,” the prosecution’s filing said. “The verdict reached by the jury was based on credible evidence and was supported by the law.”