N.D. Cent. Code » Title 29 · Chapter 29-19
North Dakota Century Code

N.D. Cent. Code § 29-19-06 (2026)

Application for continuance on ground of absent witness

✓ text as last checked Sept. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ND-LEGndlegis.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

An application for a continuance on the ground that a witness is absent must show:

1. That the applicant has used due diligence to prepare for the trial;

2. The nature of the diligence used;

3. The name and residence of the absent witness;

4. What the applicant expects or believes such witness would testify were that witness present and orally examined in court;

5. That the testimony of the witness is material;

6. The nature of any document wanted and where the same may be found;

7. That the same facts cannot be satisfactorily shown by other evidence; and

8. That the witness is not absent through the connivance or counsel of the applicant.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1975–2020 · leading case: State v. Watson, 2019 ND 164, 930 N.W.2d 145.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Watson, 2019 ND 164, 930 N.W.2d 145. · cites it 40× “[¶12] On December 20, 2017, the district court advised the parties the State must comply with N.D.C.C. § 29-19-06 for the court to properly consider whether a continuance should be granted based upon the unavailability of a witness.”
State v. Mondragon, 2020 ND 21, 937 N.W.2d 531. · cites it 10× “Mondragon resisted the motion arguing the State did not comply with N.D.C.C. § 29-19-06. The district court granted the motion, noting the State did not comply with the exact requirements of the statute, but the State’s affidavit gave the court, and Mondragon, sufficient…”
State v. Newark, 2017 ND 209, 900 N.W.2d 807. “- § 29-19-06 requires an applicant for a continuance to use due .”
State v. Berger, 234 N.W.2d 6 (N.D. 1975). · cites it 2× “Kenny’s proper relief for the alleged brevity of the continuance should have been a motion for further continuance on February 6, 1975, preferably (but not necessarily) in the nature of an application for continuance on ground of absent witness, Section 29-19-06, N.D.C.C., which…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.