State v. Curtis Maxie

Syllabus

The defendant, Curtis Maxie, appealed from the denial of his second motion for a new trial. On appeal, the defendant argued that the hearing justice erred in finding that he had failed to present newly discovered evidence that would have entitled him to a new trial. The defendant asserted that the Supreme Court's prior opinion—vacating the defendant's conviction of sex trafficking of a minor and conspiracy to do so—constituted new evidence that warranted a new trial on the remaining three counts of his conviction. The Supreme Court held that a decision on direct appeal did not constitute \newly discovered evidence\ that would justify a new trial. The Supreme Court held further that, under Rule 33 of the Superior Court Rules of Criminal Procedure, the motion under review should have been filed within ten days after the verdict or guilty finding because it was not based on newly discovered evidence. The Supreme Court therefore held that said motion, brought more than two years after the defendant was found guilty, was not timely. Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the order of the Superior Court.