The yale law journal - 1907 Author:Unknown Author Purchase of this book includes free trial access to www.million-books.com where you can read more than a million books for free. This is an OCR edition with typos. Excerpt from book: Criminal Law -- New Trial -- Newly Discovered Evidence. -- State v. Lilliston, 54 So. E. 427 (N. C.). -- Held, that in a criminal case, a motion for a new ... more »trial would not be granted by the Supreme Court, to enable the defendant to produce evidence which he had in possession at the time of the trial but withheld from the jury. Connor and Walker, JJ., dissenting. In the great majority of our states the doctrine is well established. that in the absence of any constitutional or statutory provision to the contrary it is the exclusive province of the court to determine all questions of law that arise in criminal prosecutions. Sparf v. U. S., 156 U. S. 51; State v. Elwood, 73 N. C. 189. As a general rule a new trial will be granted, if since the former trial new evidence has been found which would in all probability have changed the result of the trial. Simmons v. Mann, 72 N. Car. 12; Husted v. Mead, 58 Ct. 55. But facts which are within the knowledge of the defendant at the trial and are not put in evidence as in this case, do not constitute new evidence and are not grounds for a new trial. Heard Civil Pleading, p. 82; Tilley v. State, 55 Ga. 557; People v. Cesena, 90 Cal. 381. In criminal actions the Supreme Court of any state, in the absence of any constitutional or statutory provision to the contrary, is limited to a review and correction of errors of law committed in the trial below. Carson v. Dellingcr, 90 N. C. 226; Sumrion v. Mann, 92 N. C. 12. Evidence -- Offer Of Compromise. -- Finn v. Niw England Telephone« less