P. v. Olison
Defendant appeals from his conviction of first degree burglary, contending that the denial of his motion for a continuance of the jury trial was an abuse of discretion. Defense counsel asserted he was unprepared to proceed because he was unable to review all of the relevant evidence and subpoena additional documents due to his recent assignment to the case and additional caseload. Court conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the continuance and that defense counsel was sufficiently prepared to present an adequate defense. Hence, Court affirm.
Comments on P. v. Olison