ÿWPC; Âa‡:µWÍR’íWhkÌ Ó¾‘‹Ï+l…¸>ùz‰Œ¶X\«pÇOì5Tߨ¬¯Ï3A•xlž© îûot ×UK.„ëÎ;|þ}ýš"[g×â+ICÂ:èôþÖŠÐEy³ˆ1ŒUŒ´/®Ü+Û@kÉÅ$©yÞ¨Ê&ó9•Ê´w0¦ÚDx@~•jf,ÝnÙLilÆ-;Š3[a­ÁíñÅL Ö[çñ4Ó_µ›»#³Ñüø|K$úÆwO²T×÷±"ã/óF¿â‰•4Es!N#Â/²ˆ²Ú¨SïÉB¸c}õHwŸ¾R]ï ¨F“ËÖ^ÓG3ÊÁªp|]/•-uÿ˜#mhŠ:éJÔÜX9†û ÑñbïªM!tS 3AÁõ–hkn²dEŒ4¡XÒÇžCÔ¿¦£&ÀBÞ}žmU2ÙïZn ©­øŒÈvÓ18…zÑgWObHojÁ5Ë÷gp_· $Õ].ù©é.Œ#ˆ¼Ï´Lkãt t<ÅfW5ù<åv*©r’fÊ'g!)ªtØæ©êfä/'@0½ëCÉ`=†IYê—ÔxîœWO¶|¢7uægKgOÔ.iK¶óªõÿ9…!w+( y5÷´¡Õg„ÒÆuäÉèb#Á\ % N# 0ˆ% UN­ û x z‹ Ò z× ÒQ^ #w/Æ3Æùƿƅ4KN_apEr mtà‹ 0Dkkkk¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯b.................................... 0ë6666 B!! 0¤> D5â D- 0KDD ASÆâ 0¤¨ 0DL A«˜HP LaserJet 4,ü,,,,,ü0»(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular Ý ƒR-$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÒÜò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔApparently,€he€theorized€that€had€he€molested€the€victim,€his€long€fingernails€would€have€caused€noticeableÐ ° Ðphysical€injury. nÝ ƒR-$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÒÜò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAccording€to€the€warrants€issued€in€the€alleged€domestic€strife€between€Mrs.€Shell€and€her€boyfriend,€onlyÐ ° Ðone€of€the€alleged€incidents€occurred€prior€to€the€defendantððs€trial.€€The€other€occurred€two€days€afterwards. ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt£!)â Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5q\;'¤Ÿ lzŸ3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ ÖÝ ƒR-$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÒÜò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIt€is€the€policy€of€this€court€to€identify€minor€victims€of€sex€crimes€by€initials€only.(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó uÝ ƒR-$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÒÜò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMrs.€Shell€testified€in€that€matter€that€she€had€given€testimony€at€another€hearing€regarding€one€of€theÐ ° Ðincidents.€€It€appears€that€this€testimony€was€taken€at€a€preliminary€hearing€on€one€of€the€charges€against€her€boyfriend.- ù-(|G2-$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€·4»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÒÜò»»Ô d(|3$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€·4»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€·4»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€·4»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼·4»»»ÔÑ8€ºSXXdð»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îê·î»¼·4ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼·4»îîê· #ԈРÜ, ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àJune€2000€SessionÐ X ÐÔ‡XºSX»¼·4ÔÌò òÔ#†¼·4»XXºS#ÔState€of€Ô_ÔTennesseeeÔ_Ôòòóó€v.€Kenneth€R.€Shellòòóó.Ô‡XºSX»¼·4Ôó óÐ  ` ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Cumberland€CountyÐ  h Ðà@@øøìàNo.€5323€€€€€€Ô_ÔLillieÔ_Ô€Ann€Sells,€JudgeÐ  X ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<×` AßÐ Ø(  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E1999„02422„CCA„R3„CDÐ ×'  ÐSeptember€1,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ Ç  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<¶` AßÐ ·  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓKenneth€R.€Shell€appeals€from€his€conviction€of€aggravated€sexual€battery.€€He€seeks€a€new€trialÐ ¶ Ðbased€upon€newly€discovered€evidence.€€Finding€no€error€in€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€his€motion€forÐ ¦ö Ðnew€trial€on€this€basis,€we€affirm.Ð –æ ÐÓýÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmed.ó óÐ vÆ ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼·4»àXºS©#ÔÔ‡XºSX.¼·4ÔJames€Ô_ÔCurwoodÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔWittÔ_Ô,€Jr.,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòDavid€G.€Hayesóó€andÐ V¦ ÐòòNorma€McGee€Ogleóó,€JJ.,€joined.Ð F– ÐÌDavid€Neal€Brady,€District€Public€Defender,€Joe€L.€Finley,€Jr.,€Assistant€District€Public€Defender,Ð &v Ðfor€the€appellant,€Kenneth€R.€Shell.Ð f ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€&€Reporter,€R.€Stephen€Ô_ÔJobeÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General,Ð öF ÐWilliam€Edward€Gibson,€District€Attorney€General,€Anthony€Ô_ÔCraigheadÔ_Ô€and€Tammy€Hobby,Ð æ6 ÐAssistant€District€Attorneys€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð Ö& ÐÓŸÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼·4»XXºSÎ#ÔÔ‡XºSX»¼·4ÔÐ ¶!  ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼·4»XXºS^ #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XºSX»¼·4Ôà  àà ` àThe€defendant,€Kenneth€R.€Shell,€appeals€from€his€conviction€of€aggravated€sexualÐ –#æ" Ðbattery€for€the€fondling€of€his€step„daughter,€eight„year„old€A.H.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€this€direct€appeal,€Shell€claimsÐ †$Ö# Ðthat€he€is€entitled€to€a€new€trial€based€upon€newly€discovered€evidence€of€his€wifeððs€infidelity€andÐ v%Æ $ Ðher€untruthfulness€with€the€authorities€regarding€alleged€assaults€perpetrated€against€her€by€herÐ f&¶!% Ðboyfriend.€€Shell€claims€that€had€this€evidence€of€his€wifeððs€motive€to€ð ðget€rid€of€himðð€and€her€poorÐ V'¦"& Ðcredibility€been€known€at€the€time€of€trial,€the€result€of€his€trial€likely€would€have€been€different.€Ð F(–#' ÐFinding€no€abuse€of€discretion€in€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€Shellððs€motion€for€new€trial,€we€affirm.€Ð 6)†$( Ðâ âÐ &*v%)ý ÐÔ_Ôà  àà ` àThe€following€facts€are€relevant€to€this€appeal.€€At€trial,€A.H.€testified€that€on€theÐ ° Ðâ âevening€of€September€6,€1998,€she€was€asleep€in€bed€with€her€sister,€C.S.€€The€defendant,€her€step„Ð  ð Ðfather,€came€into€the€bedroom€wearing€a€towel€and€sat€on€the€side€of€the€bed.€€The€defendant€insertedÐ à Ðhis€finger€into€her€ð ðprivates.ðð€€A.H.€asked€the€defendant€what€he€was€doing,€and€he€did€not€respond.€Ð €Ð ÐThe€victimððs€mother,€Carol€Shell,€turned€on€the€hallway€light,€and€the€defendant€jumped€under€theÐ pÀ Ðbed.€€A.H.€testified€that€she€woke€up€when€her€mother€turned€on€the€lights.€€Carol€Shell€came€intoÐ ` ° Ðthe€girlsðð€bedroom€and€told€A.H.€and€C.S.€to€go€to€her€bed.€€Later€that€evening,€Carol€Shell€askedÐ P   ÐA.H.€why€the€defendant€had€been€in€the€girlsðð€bedroom,€and€A.H.€pointed€to€her€ð ðprivates.ðð€€A.H.Ð @  Ðtalked€to€an€investigator€with€the€sheriffððs€department€the€next€day.Ð 0 € ÐÌà  àà ` àCarol€Shell€testified€that€she€and€her€husband,€the€defendant,€were€in€bed€together€onÐ `  ÐSeptember€6,€1998.€€They€argued,€and€the€defendant€left€to€go€sleep€on€the€couch.€€The€defendantÐ P  Ðwent€to€the€living€room€for€about€ten€minutes,€and€then€Mrs.€Shell€heard€him€go€into€the€girlsððÐ ð@  Ðbedroom.€€She€heard€A.H.€ask€the€defendant€what€he€was€doing,€and€she€decided€to€get€up€toÐ à0  Ðinvestigate.€€She€turned€on€the€hallway€light€and€the€girlsðð€bedroom€light.€€A.H.€was€sitting€upÐ Ð  Ðawake.€€Mrs.€Shell€did€not€see€the€defendant,€so€she€called€out€for€him.€€She€got€no€response,€but€sheÐ À Ðsaw€him€under€the€bed.€€Mrs.€Shell€asked€the€defendant€what€he€was€doing€under€the€bed.€€He€saidÐ ° Ðnothing€at€first,€and€then€he€said€that€she€had€scared€him.€€When€the€defendant€emerged€fromÐ  ð Ðunderneath€the€bed,€Mrs.€Shell€observed€that€he€was€nude,€had€an€erection,€and€had€a€towel€in€hisÐ à Ðhand.€€Mrs.€Shell€asked€A.H.€if€the€defendant€had€come€into€the€girlsðð€bedroom€to€cover€them€up,Ð €Ð Ðand€A.H.€shook€her€head€no€and€pointed€at€her€ð ðprivates.ðð€€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àà ` àInvestigator€Hazel€Hubbard€of€the€Cumberland€County€Sheriffððs€Department€wasÐ P  Ðnotified€of€the€incident€on€September€7€and€met€with€A.H.€on€September€9.€€Investigator€HubbardÐ @ Ðtestified€that€A.H.ððs€account€on€September€9€of€the€incident€was€consistent€with€her€testimony€atÐ 0€ Ðtrial.€€Hubbard€attempted€to€locate€the€defendant€on€September€7,€but€she€was€unable€to€make€contactÐ  p Ðwith€him€for€over€30€days.€€Eventually,€on€October€20,€1998,€she€interviewed€the€defendant.€€He€saidÐ ` Ðhe€could€not€tell€her€what€happened€on€September€6€because€he€was€too€drunk€to€remember.€€TheÐ P Ðdefendant€told€Hubbard€he€did€not€know€whether€he€had€done€anything€to€the€victim.€€The€defendantÐ ð@ Ðsigned€a€statement€that€said€he€sometimes€had€blackouts€when€drinking€and€would€not€rememberÐ à0 Ðthings€for€a€day€or€two.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` àTo€counter€the€stateððs€proof,€the€defendant€testified€in€his€own€behalf.€€He€said€heÐ °"  Ðdrank€a€case€or€more€of€beer€on€September€6€and€did€not€remember€any€of€the€events€alleged€by€theÐ  #ð! Ðvictim.€€He€said€he€loved€the€victim,€and€he€knew€of€no€reason€why€he€would€molest€her.€€HeÐ $à" Ðacknowledged€that€he€told€Investigator€Hubbard€that€he€was€unable€to€say€whether€he€did€or€did€notÐ €%Ð # Ðdo€it.€€He€demonstrated€his€fingernails€to€the€jury€and€said€that€he€generally€did€not€cut€them€for€sixÐ p&À!$ Ðto€eight€weeks.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€defendant€claimed€that€by€mere€coincidence,€he€left€town€on€September€7,€theÐ `'°"% Ðday€the€incident€was€reported€to€the€sheriffððs€department,€and€went€to€Florida.€€He€claimed€he€leftÐ P( #& Ðtown€without€first€talking€to€his€wife,€his€probation€officer€or€his€boss€because€he€wanted€a€changeÐ ° Ðof€scenery€and€a€new€line€of€work.Ð  ð ÐÌà  àà ` àAfter€hearing€all€of€the€evidence,€the€jury€found€the€defendant€not€guilty€of€theÐ €Ð Ðcharged€offense€of€rape€of€a€child.€€However,€the€jury€found€the€defendant€guilty€of€the€lesser„Ð pÀ Ðincluded€offense€of€aggravated€sexual€battery.€€Ð ` ° ÐÌà  àà ` àAt€the€hearing€on€the€motion€for€new€trial,€the€defendant€alleged€that€newlyÐ @  Ðdiscovered€evidence€mandated€that€he€receive€a€new€trial.€€Defense€counsel€submitted€an€affidavitÐ 0 € Ðin€which€he€claimed€that€after€the€trial€he€discovered€that€the€defendantððs€wife€was€not€ð ða€loyal€wifeÐ  p  Ðtorn€between€supporting€her€husband€or€her€daughterðð€as€he€had€believed€at€the€time€of€trial.€€Rather,Ð `  Ðshe€was€having€an€affair€and€had€been€untruthful€either€with€law€enforcement€officers€or€in€swornÐ P  Ðtestimony€about€alleged€abuse€perpetrated€on€her€by€her€boyfriend.€€Mrs.€Shell€testified€at€the€motionÐ ð@  Ðhearing€that€she€did€not€meet€her€boyfriend€until€over€two€months€after€the€defendantððs€crime.€€SheÐ à0  Ðadmitted€that€her€boyfriend€had€been€charged€with€two€counts€of€assault€against€her,€but€thoseÐ Ð  Ðcharges€were€dismissed.€€The€defense€examined€Mrs.€Shell€extensively€about€whether€she€lied€in€herÐ À Ðreport€to€police€officers€or€in€court׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€about€the€alleged€assaults.€€Although€it€appears€from€herÐ ° Ðtestimony€at€the€hearing€that€she€was€confused€at€times,€we€gather€that€she€did€not€recall€whether€sheÐ  ð Ðhad€been€truthful€in€her€allegations€regarding€one€of€the€alleged€assaults€because€she€had€beenÐ à Ðdrinking.€€With€respect€to€the€other€alleged€assault,€she€testified€that€the€situation€had€been€one€ofÐ €Ð Ðmutual€combat.€€Thus,€we€surmise€from€her€testimony€that€she€denied€being€untruthful€to€the€officersÐ pÀ Ðor€the€court€regarding€the€alleged€assaults.€€Ð `° ÐÌà  àà ` àMrs.€Shell€also€denied€in€her€testimony€at€the€motion€hearing€that€she€and€theÐ @ Ðdefendant€had€stayed€together€overnight€since€the€defendantððs€crime.€€To€contradict€this€claim,€theÐ 0€ Ðdefense€offered€the€testimony€of€the€defendantððs€aunt€and€mother€that€the€defendant€and€Mrs.€ShellÐ  p Ðlived€with€their€children€in€the€defendantððs€auntððs€home€for€several€months€between€the€defendantððsÐ ` Ðreturn€from€Florida€and€the€trial.Ð P ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€trial€court€denied€the€motion€for€new€trial.€€Ð à0 ÐÌà  àà ` àAgainst€this€factual€backdrop,€the€defendant€appeals,€raising€as€his€sole€complaint€theÐ À! Ðdenial€of€the€motion€for€new€trial.Ð °"  ÐÌà  àà ` àTennessee€law€provides€that€it€is€within€the€trial€court's€discretion€to€grant€a€new€trialÐ $à" Ðon€the€basis€of€newly€discovered€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Goswickóó,€656€S.W.2d€355,€358€(Tenn.€1983);Ð €%Ð # Ðòòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Nicholsóó,€877€S.W.2d€722,€737€(Tenn.€1994).€€The€defendant€must€demonstrateÐ p&À!$ Ðreasonable€diligence,€materiality€and€likelihood€of€a€different€result€if€the€evidence€is€produced€andÐ `'°"% Ðaccepted€by€the€jury.€€òòGoswickóó,€656€S.W.2d€òòóóat€358-59.€€€On€appellate€review,€we€will€disturb€the€trialÐ P( #& Ðcourtððs€ruling€on€a€motion€for€new€trial€based€upon€newly€discovered€evidence€only€if€the€lowerÐ ° Ðcourt€abused€its€discretion.€€òòState€v.€Meadeóó,€942€S.W.2d€561,€565€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).Ð  ð ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€the€present€case,€the€trial€court€found€at€the€hearing€on€the€motion€for€new€trial€thatÐ €Ð Ðboth€the€victimððs€and€Mrs.€Shellððs€testimony€at€trial€had€been€very€credible.€€Further,€the€court€notedÐ pÀ Ðthat€Investigator€Hubbard€affirmed€that€the€victimððs€testimony€was€consistent€with€the€statement€thatÐ ` ° Ðthe€child€gave€only€days€after€the€crime.€€The€court€further€found€that€Mrs.€Shell€had€no€motive€inÐ P   ÐSeptember€1997,€when€the€incident€was€first€reported,€to€ð ðget€rid€ofðð€the€defendant€so€that€she€couldÐ @  Ðcarry€on€her€extramarital€activities.€€Mrs.€Shell€did€not€meet€her€boyfriend€until€over€two€monthsÐ 0 € Ðafter€the€initial€report€of€the€crime.€€The€court€also€noted€that€Mrs.€Shellððs€equivocation€regardingÐ  p  Ðthe€alleged€domestic€abuse€by€her€boyfriend€was€typical€of€that€type€of€situation€and€did€not€speakÐ `  Ðnegatively€of€her€credibility€regarding€the€crime€on€trial.Ð P  ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€evaluating€the€òòGoswickóó€factors,€we€note€that€a€showing€of€diligence€requiresÐ à0  Ðevidence€that€neither€the€defendant€nor€his€counsel€had€knowledge€of€the€alleged€facts€prior€to€trial.€Ð Ð  ÐòòSeeóó€òòJones€v.€Stateóó,€2€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€160,€165,€452€S.W.2d€365,€367€(1970).€€In€this€regard,€weÐ À Ðbelieve€that€defense€counselððs€affidavit€is€insufficient€to€establish€what€the€defendant€himself€knewÐ ° Ðabout€his€wifeððs€alleged€boyfriend€and€her€reports€of€domestic€abuse€by€him.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð  ð ÐÌà  àà ` àFurther,€we€fail€to€see€the€materiality€of€the€evidence.€€The€evidence€is€not€relevantÐ €Ð Ðto€the€crime€itself.€€Its€materiality,€if€any,€relates€to€the€credibility€of€Mrs.€Shell€as€a€prosecutionÐ pÀ Ðwitness.€€As€the€trial€court€aptly€noted,€Mrs.€Shell€was€not€involved€in€an€affair€with€her€boyfriendÐ `° Ðuntil€months€after€the€crime€was€reported€to€the€authorities.€€The€testimony€given€by€the€victim€atÐ P  Ðtrial,€which€Mrs.€Shellððs€testimony€corroborated,€was€consistent€with€that€received€during€the€initialÐ @ Ðinvestigation€of€the€crime.€€Further,€we€do€not€see€how€Mrs.€Shellððs€conduct€as€a€victim„witness€inÐ 0€ Ðcases€involving€alleged€domestic€abuse€is€material€to€the€case€at€bar.Ð  p ÐÌà  àà ` àTurning€to€the€third€òòGoswickóó€factor,€we€are€not€convinced€of€the€likelihood€of€aÐ P Ðdifferent€result€had€this€evidence€been€produced€and€accepted€by€the€jury.€€As€discussed€above,€theÐ ð@ Ðevidence€was€not€material.€€Further,€the€evidence€of€the€defendantððs€actions€spoke€loudly€of€his€guilt.€Ð à0 ÐThe€defendant€dove€under€the€victimððs€bed€to€hide€from€his€wife€when€he€was€caught€in€the€victimððsÐ Ð  Ðbedroom.€€The€defendant€did€not€deny€this€action;€he€testified€that€he€could€not€remember€whetherÐ À! Ðhe€did€it.€€He€fled€the€jurisdiction€the€day€after€the€crime,€and€at€trial€he€offered€a€dubious€excuse€thatÐ °"  Ðhis€leaving€town€was€merely€coincidental.€€Given€the€trial€courtððs€evaluation€of€the€strong€credibilityÐ  #ð! Ðof€the€victimððs€and€Mrs.€Shellððs€testimony,€as€contrasted€with€the€other€evidence€of€the€defendantððsÐ $à" Ðguilty€actions,€we€see€no€likelihood€of€a€different€result€had€Mrs.€Shellððs€credibility€been€attackedÐ €%Ð # Ðwith€the€ð ðnewly€discovered€evidence.ððÐ p&À!$ Ðâ âÐ `'°"% Ðà  àà ` àIn€addition€to€our€òòGoswickóó€analysis,€we€note€the€following€principle€of€TennesseeÐ ° Ðâ âlaw.Ð  ð ÐÌà8  àA€new€trial€will€not€be€granted€on€the€basis€of€newly€discovered€evidence€when€itÐ €Ð Ðappears€that€the€evidence€would€have€no€other€effect€than€to€discredit€the€testimonyÐ pÀ Ðof€a€witness€at€the€trial,€contradict€the€witness'€statements€or€impeach€a€witness.€€InÐ ` ° Ðorder€to€justify€the€granting€of€a€new€trial€on€the€basis€of€newly€discovered€evidence,Ð P   Ðit€must€be€shown€that€the€testimony€of€the€witness€sought€to€be€impeached€was€soÐ @  Ðimportant€to€the€issue€and€the€impeaching€evidence€was€so€strong€and€convincingÐ 0 € Ðthat€a€different€result€at€trial€must€necessarily€follow.Ð p Ð Ð  ÐÌòòState€v.€Arnoldóó,€719€S.W.2d€543,€550€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1986)€(citing€òòGentry€v.€Stateóó,€184€Tenn.Ð P  Ð299,€311,€198€S.W.2d€643,€648„49€(1947));€òòseeóóòòState€v.€Singletonóó,€853€S.W.2d€490,€496€(Tenn.Ð ð@  Ð1993)€(newly€discovered€impeachment€evidence€is€a€proper€basis€for€a€new€trial€only€where€it€is€soÐ à0  Ðcrucial€to€the€question€of€guilt€or€innocence€that€its€admission€would€likely€result€in€an€acquittal).€Ð Ð  ÐThe€evidence€the€defendant€offered€at€the€hearing€on€the€motion€for€new€trial€was€entirelyÐ À Ðimpeachment€evidence.€€As€discussed€above,€it€was€not€of€such€a€character€that€its€relevance€wasÐ ° Ðgreat€or€its€strength€was€such€that€the€outcome€of€the€trial€is€in€serious€question.€€Under€òòArnoldóó,€theÐ  ð Ðnew€evidence€in€this€case€was€not€a€sufficient€basis€for€the€grant€of€a€new€trial.Ð à ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€sum,€we€see€no€abuse€of€discretion€in€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€the€motion€for€newÐ pÀ Ðtrial.€€The€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€therefore€affirmed.Ð `° ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð  p Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJAMES€CURWOOD€WITT,€JR.,€JUDGE