What is the standard for a motion for a new trial based on insufficiency of the evidence?

Defendant contends that the trial court applied the wrong standard to the motion for a new trial because it was based on newly discovered evidence, not insufficiency of the evidence. The People appropriately concede error. Instead of determining whether the newly discovered evidence would " 'make a different result probable on retrial' " (Verdugo, supra, 50 Cal.4th at p. 308), the trial court found that it effectively sat as a "13th juror," that the evidence was "sufficient," and that "the jury reached the right decision." The standard that the trial court applied here is appropriate for a ruling on a motion for a new trial based on insufficiency of the evidence. (See Porter v. Superior

Page 18