OPINION OF THE COURT

This is an appeal from appellant’s conviction by a jury of third degree murder, criminal conspiracy and aggravated assault. Appellant contends

(1) after-discovered evidence mandates granting a new trial;

(2) oral statements made by appellant immediately preceding and immediately following his arrest should have been suppressed;

(3) the identification of appellant at the preliminary hearing by an eyewitness was invalid;

(4) the trial court erred in refusing to order disclosure of an informant;

(5) the seizure of an automobile was without probable cause and the identification of the auto at trial was invalid;

(6) the indictment against appellant should have been quashed; and

(7) a mistrial should have been granted due to prosecutorial misconduct.

*33We have carefully reviewed each of these issues and find them to be without merit.

The judgments of sentence of the Court of Common Pleas are affirmed.