Case ID: f-appx_51/html/0190-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Robert G. HORN, Appellant.
    No. 02-2188.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 7, 2002.
    Decided Nov. 19, 2002.
    Before HANSEN, Chief Judge, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Robert G. Horn appeals the district court’s denial of his Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33 motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, following his conviction for possessing child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B) (1994). After careful review of the record, we find that the district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that the new evidence submitted by Mr. Horn was merely impeaching and would not be likely to produce an acquittal at a new trial. See United States v. Provost, 969 F.2d 617, 620 (8th Cir.1992) (standard of review), cert, denied, 506 U.S. 1056, 113 S.Ct. 986, 122 L.Ed.2d 139 (1993); United States v. Duke, 255 F.3d 656, 659 (8th Cir.) (criteria for granting new trial based on newly discovered evidence), cert, denied, — U.S. -, 122 S.Ct. 550,151 L.Ed.2d 426 (2001).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy. 
      
      . The Honorable E. Richard Webber, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.