Actor Kevin Guthrie had his prison term for sexual assault reduced after senior judges agreed his previous good character and the 'devastating' impact on his career should have been taken into account by a sheriff.
Sunshine on Leith star Guthrie, 34, was released after he won an appeal which saw his three year sentence reduced to two.
He had been jailed last May for preying on a woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, at a flat in Glasgow's west end in September 2017.
READ MORE: Paisley woman, 29, who screamed 'yes' after murdering man faces life sentence
Glasgow Sheriff Court heard the attack took place at a property belonging to fellow actor Scott Reid - who shot to fame as Methadone Mick in BBC Scotland's beloved comedy Still Game.
Guthrie denied any wrongdoing and said he had only 'helped' the woman after she fell ill.
The actor, who also starred in the Fantastic Beasts films and Netflix series The English Game, was found guilty after a four-day trial and placed on the sex offenders register indefinitely.
The Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh later saw Guthrie fail in a bid to quash his conviction.
But defence advocate Ian Duguid QC successfully argued that the sentence imposed on him was too lengthy.
Judges Lord Carloway, Lord Pentland and Lord Matthews agreed and reduced Guthrie's sentence from three to two years.
Guthrie was released from custody immediately as he has already served the equivalent of a two year term.
A written judgement delivered by Lord Carloway has now revealed Guthrie's appeal for his sentence to be cut had succeeded in part due to his previous good character.
The judges said Guthrie posed a low risk of re-offending although he continues to claim he is innocent.
Lord Carloway said: "Although it was recognised by the appellant that a custodial sentence was appropriate, it was submitted that the sheriff had attributed insufficient weight to the appellant's previous exemplary character, his charity work and the devastating effect which the conviction would have on his career.
"The court agrees with that submission. The crime committed was a serious one. It is an inexplicable one when set against the appellant's background.
"Most important, the appellant's conviction is likely to end, at least for the foreseeable future, the successful career which he has worked hard to achieve.
"In these circumstances, the court will quash the sentence of three years and substitute one of two years imprisonment."
