Hannon v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Hannon v. State

226 So. 2d 90, 284 Ala. 487, 1969 Ala. LEXIS 1120

Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided August 14, 1969·No. 2 Div. 521·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

SIMPSON, Justice.

This appeal is from a verdict and judgment of guilty of robbery and a sentence of 20 years and one day in the penitentiary.

Appellant contends only that the trial court erred in refusing to grant his request for a continuance because a witness who had been subpoenaed was not present, there being no return made of the subpoena.

We have repeatedly held that whether a continuance in a criminal case should be granted for absent witnesses is within the discretion of the trial judge. 6A Ala.Dig. Criminal Law "^594, et seq.

[488]*488We have reviewed the record before us and cannot conclude that the trial judge abused his discretion.

Affirmed.

COLEMAN, HARWOOD, and BLOOD-WORTH, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

SIMPSON, Justice.

This appeal is from a verdict and judgment of guilty of robbery and a sentence of 20 years and one day in the penitentiary.

Appellant contends only that the trial court erred in refusing to grant his request for a continuance because a witness who had been subpoenaed was not present, there being no return made of the subpoena.

We have repeatedly held that whether a continuance in a criminal case should be granted for absent witnesses is within the discretion of the trial judge. 6A Ala.Dig. Criminal Law "^594, et seq.

[488]*488We have reviewed the record before us and cannot conclude that the trial judge abused his discretion.

Affirmed.

COLEMAN, HARWOOD, and BLOOD-WORTH, JJ., concur.

Hannon v. State, 226 So. 2d 90, 284 Ala. 487, 1969 Ala. LEXIS 1120 (Ala. 1969).

Pincite

226 So. 2d 90 (Hannon v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related