California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Meeks, A140262 (Cal. App. 2017):
"When a continuance is sought to secure the attendance of a witness, the defendant must establish 'he had exercised due diligence to secure the witness's attendance, that the witness's expected testimony was material and not cumulative, that the testimony could be obtained within a reasonable time, and that the facts to which the witness would testify could not otherwise be proven.' " (People v. Jenkins (2000) 22 Cal.4th 900, 1037.) " '[T]he trial judge . . . must consider not only the benefit which the moving party anticipates but also the likelihood that such a benefit will result, the burden on other witnesses, jurors and the court and, above all, whether substantial justice will be accomplished or defeated by a granting of the motion.' " (People v. Zapien (1993) 4 Cal.4th 929, 972.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.