What are the five factors used in assessing newly discovered evidence in a motion for a new trial?

To the extent appellant contends that the trial court erred by not expressly discussing the five factors listed in People v. Delgado (1993) 5 Cal.4th 312, 328, for evaluating newly discovered evidence,⁴ the contention begs the question. Only if the trial court determines that the recantation is credible must it consider the other requirements for granting a new trial on the grounds of newly discovered evidence. (See Minnick, supra, 214 Cal.App.3d at p. 1482 ["Once the trial court has found the recantation to be believable, it must then decide whether consideration of the recantation would render a different result on retrial reasonably probable"].) Given that the court found that the recantation was not credible (that is, not worthy of belief by a reasonable jury), the court necessarily concluded that the recantation would not render a different result probable on retrial. That determination was sufficient to deny the new trial motion.