Continuance of Trial Date – Grant or Denial
Unless otherwise indicated, all indented material is copied directly from the court’s opinion.
Decisions of the Tennessee Supreme Court
Decisions of the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals
State v. Allen, No. E2022-00437-CCA-R3-CD, p. 30 (Tenn. Ct. Crim. App. July 12, 2023).
A trial court’s denial of a continuance will be reversed only if it appears that the trial court abused its discretion to the prejudice of the defendant. State v. Odom, 137 S.W.3d 572, 589 (Tenn. 2004). “An abuse of discretion is demonstrated by showing that the failure to grant a continuance denied defendant a fair trial or that it could be reasonably concluded that a different result would have followed had the continuance been granted.” State v. Schmeiderer, 319 S.W.3d 607, 617 (Tenn. 2010) (quoting State v. Hines, 919 S.W.2d 573, 579 (Tenn. 1995)). “The only test is whether the defendant has been deprived of his rights and an injustice done.” State v. Goodman, 643 S.W.2d 375, 378 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1982). The defendant bears the burden on appeal of demonstrating that harm ensued from the denial of the requested continuance. State v. Willis, 496 S.W.3d 653, 745 (Tenn. 2016) (citing State v. Vaughn, 279 S.W.3d 584, 598 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2008)).
State v. Daniels, No. E2021-00561-CCA-R3-CD, p. 6 (Tenn. Ct. Crim. App. June 29, 2022).
The grant or denial of a continuance rests within the sound discretion of the trial court. State v. Rimmer, 250 S.W.3d 12, 40 (Tenn. 2008) (citing State v. Odom, 137 S.W.3d 572, 589 (Tenn. 2004)). The decision to deny a continuance will be reversed by this Court “only if it appears that the trial court abused its discretion to the prejudice of the defendant.” Odom, 137 S.W.3d at 589 (citing State v. Hines, 919 S.W.2d 573, 579 (Tenn. 1995)). “An abuse of discretion is demonstrated by showing that the failure to grant a continuance denied defendant a fair trial or that it could be reasonably concluded that a different result would have followed had the continuance been granted.” Hines, 919 S.W.2d at 579 (citing State v. Wooden, 658 S.W.2d 553, 558 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1983)). When a defendant claims that the denial of a continuance constitutes a denial of due process, then he or she must establish actual prejudice. Rimmer, 250 S.W.3d at 40 (citing Odom, 137 S.W.3d at 589).
