| The judge wrote in an order that the Indiana Court of Appeals' decision last fall to uphold James Hill's conviction was final and the "purported 'newly discovered evidence' is insufficient to warrant a new trial." |
|
|---|
| The judge wrote in an order that the Indiana Court of Appeals' decision last fall to uphold James Hill's conviction was final and the "purported 'newly discovered evidence' is insufficient to warrant a new trial." |
|
|
|
|
|
|---|
|
|
