Diamond v. State

For reasons other than those arrived at by the trial court, the majority affirms denial of defendant’s motion to vacate. I disagree.

Defendant questions denial of his Rule 1 motion which alleged newly discovered evidence that would probably have changed the outcome of his trial, had it been known and presented therein.

Pursuant to an investigation concerning sale and possession of marijuana, two detectives placed one Daniel Gruosso under surveillance. They followed a car driven and owned by him, in which defendant had become a passenger shortly before it was stopped.

After observing articles…