Whitt v. State

Shulman, Presiding Judge.

Defendant appeals his conviction of the offense of aggravated sodomy. We affirm.

1. Appellant contends that the trial court erred in denying his extraordinary motion for new trial based upon newly discovered evidence. Some of the alleged newly discovered evidence pertained to the fact that the victim was acquainted with and had contact with a man (not the defendant) who was a “known” homosexual.

“ ‘(I)t 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…