Upon them the judge's findings are final. The granting or the denial of a motion for a new trial rests in the judicial discretion of the trial judge. His decision will not be disturbed unless it is vitiated by errors of law, or abuse of discretion. The defendants contend that there are errors of law, and that the judge, in denying their motion, has abused his judicial discretion and demonstrated prejudice. The law in regard to motions for new trial based upon newly discovered evidence is fully and accurately stated in Davis v.
Further discussion is unnecessary.
The principles therein stated are controlling. We shall deal with the defendants' contentions in the order of presentation in their brief. Before the arguments in the motion were made, the defendants filed eight requests for rulings of law and, about ten days later, they sent to the judge a ninth request to which the district attorney objected because it was filed too late. Because it was unsigned, the clerk refused to show or to give a copy of the second paper to counsel, and none was received by counsel until October 29. On November 1, the judge signed the paper and counsel was so notified on the next day.