United States v. Frederick Isiah Granger
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Frederick Isiah GRANGER, Defendant-Appellant
Opinion
OPINION PER CURIAM:
Appellant Granger challenges the District Court’s denial of a motion for a new trial after a conviction for violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 472 , 473, transfer and possession of counterfeit money. We affirm.
The conviction of appellant was affirmed by this court. 475 F.2d 1022 (9th Cir.), cert, denied, 412 U.S. 929 , 93 S.Ct. 2757 , 37 L.Ed.2d 157 (1973). A new trial is sought because of the presence of “newly discovered” evidence. A full hearing was held by the trial court on appellant’s motion.
It is well settled that the scope of review of a denial of a motion for a new trial is narrow and reversal will be ordered only when it is clear that the District Court abused its discretion. United States v. Craft, 421 F.2d 693, 695 (9th Cir. 1970); Pitts v. United States, 263 F.2d 808, 810-811 (9th Cir.), cert, denied, 360 U.S. 919 , 79 S.Ct. 1438 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1535 (1959).
A review of the record clearly discloses that the evidence relied upon by the appellant was not newly discovered and unknown to the defendant at the time of trial. Nor would the evidence probably have produced an acquittal. United States v. Cativiela, 460 F.2d 192 (9th Cir. 1972) (per curiam).
Judgment affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.