the absence was attributable to some unforeseeable cause. When the absence of counsel is caused by an act or omission of the defendant, a continuance may be properly denied. The Supreme Court of the United States will not postpone argument for the purpose of giving a famous counsel an opportunity to appear for a party adequately represented by other able counsel. Discretion for the criminal trial court to grant or deny a continuance is ultimately limited and defined by the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. These include the right to have effective counsel. Case law discussed. A legitimate difference of opinion in trial tactics between the defendant and counsel (lawyer) can be a reason for dismissing the lawyer in a criminal case, and the seeking of a continuance. A continuance may be granted if the counsel is legitimately engaged in another professional proceeding. Surprise A continuance may be granted in a criminal case where matters arise that could not have been reasonably anticipated. A continuance should be granted where depositions with information tending to create an alibi for the accused had been suppressed. If the defendant has been deceived by the state in a criminal action, a continuance can be granted. A continuance can be granted if there is an amendment to the indictment or introduction of new information in the criminal complaint. A continuance may be granted because unexpected evidence or testimony has emerged. This includes additional witnesses not named in the original indictment, or unanticipated testimony of witnesses, such as major differences of fact from deposition and trial. Minor differences in testimony do not constitute surprise. Other grounds In some cases, the denial of a continuance to allow for adequate trial preparation may constitute grounds for an allegation of denial of effective assistance of counsel as required by the Sixth Amendment. The propriety of the trial court's refusal of a continuance sought on the ground of a want of time for a preparation of the defense of a criminal case depends on the facts and circumstances of the individual case. A conviction may be reversed if, in the discretion of the court, the accused was not given an adequate time to prepare a defense, and this was material in depriving the accused of a fair trial. A criminal prosecution may be continued if the defendant is too