What is the test for admitting fresh evidence on an appeal?

The test for admission of fresh evidence on a sentence appeal is set out in R. v. Angelillo, 2006 SCC 55, [2006] 2 S.C.R. 728 at para. 13, as the test established in Palmer v. The Queen, 1979 CanLII 8 (SCC), [1980] 1 S.C.R. 759, 50 C.C.C. (2d) 193, and affirmed in R. v. Levesque, 2000 SCC 47, [2000] 2 S.C.R. 487: (1) The evidence should generally not be admitted if, by due diligence, it could have been adduced at trial provided that this general principle will not be applied as strictly in a criminal case as in civil cases. (2) The evidence must be relevant in the sense that it bears upon a decisive or potentially decisive issue relating to the sentence. (3) The evidence must be credible in the sense that it is reasonably capable of belief. (4) The evidence must be such that if believed it could reasonably, when taken with the other evidence adduced at trial, be expected to have affected the result.