Case ID: ala_284/html/0487-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "SIMPSON, Justice.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

226 So.2d 90
    Julius HANNON v. STATE of Alabama.
    2 Div. 521.
    Supreme Court of Alabama.
    Aug. 14, 1969.
    ' O. S. Burke, Jr., Centreville, for appellant.
    MacDonald Gallion, Atty. Gen., John A. Lockett, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   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.

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

Affirmed.

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