What is the test for a motion for a continuance to enable a defendant to prepare for trial?

We review for an abuse of discretion a court's denial of a defendant's motion for a continuance to enable his retained counsel to prepare for trial. (Courts, supra, 37 Cal.3d at pp. 790-791.) "[D]iscretion is abused only when the court exceeds the bounds of reason, all circumstances being considered." (People v. Beames (2007) 40 Cal.4th 907, 920.) "Although 'a myopic insistence upon expeditiousness in the face of a justifiable request for delay can render the right to defend with counsel an empty formality[,] . . . [t]here are no mechanical tests for deciding when a denial of a continuance is so arbitrary as to violate due process.' [Citation.] Instead, '[t]he answer must be found in the circumstances present in every case, particularly in the reasons

Page 11