State Codes and Statutes

Statutes > Missouri > T37 > C545 > 545_720

Contents of affidavit.

545.720. A motion to continue a cause on the part of thedefendant on account of the absence of evidence must be supportedby the oath or affidavit of the defendant or some reputableperson in his behalf, showing the materiality of the evidenceexpected to be obtained, and that due diligence has been used toobtain it, and where the evidence may be; and if it is for anabsent witness, the affidavit must give his name, and show wherehe resides or may be, and the probability of procuring histestimony, and within what time, and what facts he believes thewitness will prove, and that he believes them to be true, andthat he is unable to prove such facts by any other witness whosetestimony can be as readily procured, and that the witness is notabsent by the connivance, procurement or consent of thedefendant, and what diligence, if any, has been used in thepremises by the defendant, and that the application is not madefor vexation or delay merely, but to obtain substantial justiceon the trial of the cause.

(RSMo 1939 § 4043)

Prior revisions: 1929 § 3654; 1919 § 3997; 1909 § 5204

(1952) Where defendant did not comply in writing with the provisions of this section, court did not err in refusing continuance. State v. Abbott (Mo.), 245 S.W.2d 876.

(1952) Application for continuance which did not show what diligence was exercised to obtain witness' testimony nor the probability and time of procuring same and which failed to state that affiant believed the facts to which witness would testify, were true, held insufficient. State v. Bockman (Mo.), 251 S.W.2d 607.

State Codes and Statutes

Statutes > Missouri > T37 > C545 > 545_720

Contents of affidavit.

545.720. A motion to continue a cause on the part of thedefendant on account of the absence of evidence must be supportedby the oath or affidavit of the defendant or some reputableperson in his behalf, showing the materiality of the evidenceexpected to be obtained, and that due diligence has been used toobtain it, and where the evidence may be; and if it is for anabsent witness, the affidavit must give his name, and show wherehe resides or may be, and the probability of procuring histestimony, and within what time, and what facts he believes thewitness will prove, and that he believes them to be true, andthat he is unable to prove such facts by any other witness whosetestimony can be as readily procured, and that the witness is notabsent by the connivance, procurement or consent of thedefendant, and what diligence, if any, has been used in thepremises by the defendant, and that the application is not madefor vexation or delay merely, but to obtain substantial justiceon the trial of the cause.

(RSMo 1939 § 4043)

Prior revisions: 1929 § 3654; 1919 § 3997; 1909 § 5204

(1952) Where defendant did not comply in writing with the provisions of this section, court did not err in refusing continuance. State v. Abbott (Mo.), 245 S.W.2d 876.

(1952) Application for continuance which did not show what diligence was exercised to obtain witness' testimony nor the probability and time of procuring same and which failed to state that affiant believed the facts to which witness would testify, were true, held insufficient. State v. Bockman (Mo.), 251 S.W.2d 607.


State Codes and Statutes

State Codes and Statutes

Statutes > Missouri > T37 > C545 > 545_720

Contents of affidavit.

545.720. A motion to continue a cause on the part of thedefendant on account of the absence of evidence must be supportedby the oath or affidavit of the defendant or some reputableperson in his behalf, showing the materiality of the evidenceexpected to be obtained, and that due diligence has been used toobtain it, and where the evidence may be; and if it is for anabsent witness, the affidavit must give his name, and show wherehe resides or may be, and the probability of procuring histestimony, and within what time, and what facts he believes thewitness will prove, and that he believes them to be true, andthat he is unable to prove such facts by any other witness whosetestimony can be as readily procured, and that the witness is notabsent by the connivance, procurement or consent of thedefendant, and what diligence, if any, has been used in thepremises by the defendant, and that the application is not madefor vexation or delay merely, but to obtain substantial justiceon the trial of the cause.

(RSMo 1939 § 4043)

Prior revisions: 1929 § 3654; 1919 § 3997; 1909 § 5204

(1952) Where defendant did not comply in writing with the provisions of this section, court did not err in refusing continuance. State v. Abbott (Mo.), 245 S.W.2d 876.

(1952) Application for continuance which did not show what diligence was exercised to obtain witness' testimony nor the probability and time of procuring same and which failed to state that affiant believed the facts to which witness would testify, were true, held insufficient. State v. Bockman (Mo.), 251 S.W.2d 607.