431 S.E.2d 159 | Ga. Ct. App. | 1993
Shannon Brantley appeals from his conviction of child molestation and from the denial of his motion for a new trial. In his sole enumeration of error, Brantley contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a new trial based upon newly discovered evidence. This contention is without merit. “It is incumbent on a party who asks for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence to satisfy the court: (1) that the evidence has come to his knowledge since the trial; (2) that it was not owing to the want of due diligence that he did not acquire it sooner; (3) that it is so material that it would probably produce a different verdict; (4) that it is not cumulative only; (5) that the affidavit of the witness himself should be procured or its absence accounted for; and (6) that a new trial will not be granted if the only effect of the evidence will be to impeach the credit of a witness. Failure to show any one requirement is sufficient to deny a motion for new trial.” (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Tims v. State, 168 Ga. App. 409, 411 (2) (309 SE2d 405) (1983). The newly discovered evidence in this case was a report of a physical examina
Judgment affirmed.
