Opinion ID: 1190103
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The appellant has failed to demonstrate due diligence.

Text: The appellant errs in contending that the key issue is the innocence or guilt of appellee of the homicide of Burke. The record shows clearly that the complaint of appellee was bottomed upon a claim that he was subjected to arrest, imprisonment, and prosecution by appellant without appellant having the necessary probable cause to so subject the appellee at the time of the arrest. It is elementary that probable cause must be premised on the knowledge of facts at the time of the arrest and not upon knowledge obtained subsequently. Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 16, 68 S.Ct. 367, 92 L.Ed. 436 (1948); Henry v. United States, 361 U.S. 98, 103, 80 S.Ct. 168, 4 L.Ed.2d 134 (1959). Thus, the proffered newly discovered evidence is irrelevant and immaterial to the issue of whether probable cause existed at the time of appellee's arrest and incarceration. Assuming, arguendo, the proffered evidence is material to the issue in question, nevertheless, we are of the opinion that the appellant has failed to demonstrate due diligence in the discovery of the evidence. We therefore affirm the trial court's denial of a new trial.