State v. Elliott

CLARK, Judge.

The direct examination of the prosecuting witness Shumate was conducted before noon, and the court then recessed for lunch. After lunch, Shumate did not appear to testify and could not be found. As a consequence, the trial judge ordered a recess *383until 9:30 a.m. the following day. Defendants objected and moved to dismiss, but the motions were denied. Motions for mistrial were made the next morning, but were again denied. Shu-mate testified on cross-examination that he went home.

The same rules applicable to continuance should logically apply to the granting of recesses during the…