State v. Bruce Moten, 187 A.3d 1080

October 22, 2014 shooting in Providence left Terry Robinson dead and Delacey Andrade injured; surveillance showed a black Infiniti (Henry Lopez’s car) near the scene.
Defendant Bruce Moten rode with Henry Lopez and Tevin Briggs earlier that morning; both Moten and Tevin had handguns and were seen exiting the Infiniti and later returning with guns after shots were fired.
Henry later fled, pled guilty under a cooperation agreement, and testified against Moten; Yadi and surveillance/cell‑site data corroborated parts of Henry’s account.
FBI CAST agent Jennifer Banks testified without objection about historical cell‑site analysis placing Moten’s phone near the shooting and later at 49 Tappan Street; Det. Theodore Michael extracted phone data and testified about call detail records.
Moten was convicted on multiple counts (murder, firearms offenses, assaults, conspiracy, carrying without a license), sentenced to consecutive prison terms including two life sentences; he appealed challenging cell‑site testimony and the denial of his new‑trial motion.

Issue	State's Argument	Moten's Argument	Held
Admissibility/weight of Det. Michael’s testimony about Courtney Rivers’s phone location	Testimony was routine CDR/location testimony and helped show Courtney was not at scene; trial counsel had opportunity to cross‑examine	Michael was not qualified to offer historical cell‑site expert opinions and his testimony improperly undermined Moten’s theory that Courtney was the shooter	Waived on appeal because Moten did not object at trial; issue not preserved
Sufficiency/weight of evidence/new trial based on witness credibility	Henry’s testimony, corroborated by surveillance, cell‑site analysis, and other evidence, was credible and sufficient to convict	Conviction rested almost entirely on Henry (a cooperating witness with incentives to lie); verdict against weight of evidence warrants new trial	Trial justice properly acted as thirteenth juror, found Henry credible, and did not err in denying new‑trial motion

Owens v. Silvia, 838 A.2d 881 (R.I. 2003) (standard for review of expert admissibility and purpose of expert testimony)
Morra v. Harrop, 791 A.2d 472 (R.I. 2002) (trial justice discretion in admitting expert testimony)
State v. Heredia, 10 A.3d 443 (R.I. 2010) (trial justice as thirteenth juror on new‑trial motions)
State v. Porter, 179 A.3d 1218 (R.I. 2018) (deference to trial justice’s new‑trial credibility findings)
State v. Phannavong, 21 A.3d 321 (R.I. 2011) (trial justice’s role in weighing evidence for new trial)
State v. Lopez, 129 A.3d 77 (R.I. 2016) (trial justice need only give concise reasons when denying new trial)
State v. Pona, 66 A.3d 454 (R.I. 2013) (raise‑or‑waive rule for appellate review)
State v. McManus, 990 A.2d 1229 (R.I. 2010) (requirement of specific objection at trial to preserve issue)
State v. Bido, 941 A.2d 822 (R.I. 2008) (cannot raise new theory on appeal not presented at trial)
State v. Giard, 155 A.3d 1193 (R.I. 2017) (deference to trial justice’s credibility determinations)