What is the test for a motion to grant a new trial based on newly discovered evidence?

The district court has "discretion to grant a new trial based on newly discovered evidence if, among other things, the evidence is so material and non-cumulative that its admission would probably lead to an acquittal." United States v. Amato, 540 F.3d 153, 164 (2d Cir. 2008). Such a motion is granted, however, "only in the most extraordinary circumstances" and requires the defendant to demonstrate that the evidence "could not have been discovered through the exercise of due diligence before or during trial, and that the evidence is so material and noncumulative that its admission would probably lead to an acquittal." United States v. Parkes, 497 F.3d 220, 233 (2d Cir. 2007) (emphasis in original) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). New evidence that "merely discredits a government witness and does not directly contradict the government's case ordinarily does not justify the grant of a new trial." United States v. Spencer, 4 F.3d 115, 119 (2d Cir. 1993) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). "We review a

Page 11