Tucker v. State

Citations

• 78 Fla. 549
• 83 So. 567

Syllabus

<p>Where an application for a continuance on the ground of an absent witness in all essentials conforms to the rule laid down by this court, except that instead of alleging that the witness is “within the jurisdiction of the court” alleges that “they iare absent in France as Soldiers of the United States and are thus absent without their consent expressly or impliedly given; that no subpoena has been issued for them returnable to this court because a subpoena would be unavailing in their cases but that s,aid Soldiers of the United States doing duty overseas are being returned rapidly to this -country in large numbers and that before the next term of the court the defendants, movants herein, believe both of said witnesses will be in Wakulla County and responsive to process from this coprt;” it presents a condition not contemplated when the rule was adopted, and is ja sufficient showing, all the other elements of a proper application for a continuance being present, to entitle the defendants to a continuance.</p>