What is the test for a motion for a new trial in a sexual assault case?

The trial court heard evidence at the hearing on defendant's motion for a new trial on the issues of whether trial counsel was ineffective in misadvising defendant about his right to testify and whether trial counsel was ineffective in promising the jury defendant would testify and thereby prove his innocence. A trial court's ruling on a motion for a new trial is reviewed under the deferential, abuse-of-discretion standard. (See People v. Lightsey (2012) 54 Cal.4th 668, 729 [stating the trial court's ruling on a new-trial motion " ' "is so completely within that court's discretion that a reviewing court will not disturb the ruling absent a manifest and unmistakable abuse of that discretion" ' [Citation.]"].) " 'Deferential review is particularly necessary when . . . the factual determination depends in part on judging a witness's credibility,' and we must uphold such a determination if it is supported by substantial evidence. [Citation.]" (People v. Rabanales (2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 494, 509.) We cannot reweigh the evidence, as the credibility of witnesses

Page 20