Amerson v. State

Two continuances of this case had been granted to the defendant at previous terms of the court. A third continuance was moved for on account of the absence of a witness whose possible testimony the defendant discovered in July, 1915. The de*178fendant applied to the clerk of the court for a subpoena on August 19 thereafter, which he directed the clerk to deliver to the sheriff for service. On September 6 the motion for a continuance was made, and the defendant then testified that he had seen the witness two or three weeks before, but it does not appear that he made any inquiry at that time…