State v. Rosario, 35 A.3d 938

Defendant Rosario was convicted on two counts of first-degree child molestation.
Victim Joan, aged 13 in May 2007, reported sexual contact with a man she met online; authorities identified Rosario.
Trial in Oct 2008 featured five prosecution witnesses and Rosario testifying in his own defense.
Following the guilty verdict, defense moved for a new trial; the trial judge denied the motion after a three-step Cerda-based analysis.
Rosario was sentenced to 25 years on each count, to run concurrently, with portions suspended and probation imposed.
Appellate court affirmed, concluding the trial judge did not err in denying the motion for a new trial and that credibility determinations supported the verdict.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred in denying the motion for a new trial.	Cerda-based believability of witnesses supports the verdict.	Inconsistencies and incredibility warrant a new trial.	No error; verdict affirmed; trial court credited core testimony and would have reached same result.

Cerda v. State, 957 A.2d 382 (R.I.2008) (three-step test for new-trial motions; credibility assessment)
Guerra v. State, 12 A.3d 759 (R.I.2011) (thirteenth juror standard; credibility and weight of evidence)
Morales v. State, 895 A.2d 114 (R.I.2006) (three-factor analysis for sufficiency of evidence and jury conformity)
Texeira v. State, 944 A.2d 132 (R.I.2008) (great weight given to trial judge's reasoning in new-trial denial)