2012 Conference Executive Record Report.pdf - YMCA of Greater ...

CONCLUSION
The Appellant’s request to have a new trial is unnecessary and unwarranted. The trial
judge did not abuse her discretion when denying any of the Appellant’s requests. Their request
for another continuance was unsubstantiated because they did not follow the necessary steps
before they requested it. Also, in People v. Foy (supra at 478), they came to the conclusion that
“when the witness is identified to the court, and is found to be within the jurisdiction, a request
for a short adjournment after a showing of some diligence and good faith should not be denied
merely because of possible inconvenience to the court or others.” The quote states that a short
adjournment should be granted when some effort is placed into locating a witness. We agree,
with the trial Judge, as two adjournments had been granted, making another unnecessary. In
addition, the request for another recess to further discuss the case was also needless because the
Appellant and his attorney had numerous opportunities from the beginning of the trial to consult.
Therefore, the Respondent asks the Court to uphold the trial judge’s decision in its entirety.
Respectfully Submitted,
___________________
Colton Bishop District 3
___________________
Daniel Schwartz District 3
___________________
Rebecca Sung District 3
37