Is a motion for continuance subject to review under the abuse of the discretion standard?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Mickey, 286 Cal.Rptr. 801, 54 Cal.3d 612, 818 P.2d 84 (Cal. 1991):

It follows that on appeal, a ruling on a motion for continuance is subject to review under the abuse-of-discretion standard. (See, e.g., People v. Grant, supra, 45 Cal.3d at pp. 843-844, 248 Cal.Rptr. 444, 755 P.2d 894.)

Other Questions


When reviewing a motion for a new trial, does the appellate court apply the standard of "abuse of discretion" in denying the motion? (California, United States of America)
Is a motion concerning the admissibility of evidence subject to review for abuse of discretion? (California, United States of America)
Are evidentiary rulings reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard of review? (California, United States of America)
Can a motion for a continuance be reviewed for abuse of discretion? (California, United States of America)
Is a denial of a request for continuance to supplement a motion reviewed for abuse of discretion? (California, United States of America)
Can a motion for a continuance be reviewed for abuse of discretion? (California, United States of America)
Is a superior court's decision not to continue, on its own motion, a hearing for a restraining order under the DVPA reviewed for abuse of discretion? (California, United States of America)
What is the standard of review for a motion of appeal against a finding of abuse of discretion? (California, United States of America)
What is the standard of abuse of discretion in the appellate review of the denial of Romero motions? (California, United States of America)
Does the trial court abuse its discretion by denying a motion for continuance by denying the requested continuance? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.