An application for a continuance on account of the absence of witnesses or their evidence shall show:
Rule 65.04.Motion for a Continuance on Account of Absence of Witnesses Shall Show What.
Part I · Rule 65: Continuances · Last amended January 1, 2025 · Last verified July 22, 2026
This rule prints two full, separately-dated versions in the official compilation (a pending or recent amendment straddle); both are shown below.
In one sentenceRule 65.04 lists the specific facts a continuance motion based on an absent witness must show — the materiality of the testimony, diligence in trying to secure the witness, what the witness would prove, and the absence of any bad-faith purpose.
Full Text of Rule 65.04
Rule 65.04. Motion for a Continuance on Account of Absence of Witnesses Shall Show What. — Effective until January 1, 2025
(1) The facts showing the materiality of the evidence sought to be obtained and due diligence upon the part of the applicant to obtain such witness or testimony;
(2) The name and residence of such witness, if known, or, if not known, the use of diligence to obtain the same and also facts showing reasonable grounds for belief that the attendance or testimony of such witness will be procured within a reasonable time;
(3) What particular facts the applicant believes the witness will prove, and that the applicant knows of no other person whose evidence or attendance the applicant could have procured at the trial by whom the applicant can prove or so fully prove the same facts;
(4) That such witness is not absent by the connivance, consent or procurement of the applicant, and such application is not made for vexation or delay but in good faith for the purpose of obtaining a fair and impartial trial.
Rule 65.04. Motion for a Continuance on Account of Absence of Witnesses Shall Show What. — Effective January 1, 2025
A motion for a continuance on account of the absence of witnesses or their evidence shall show:
(1) The facts showing the materiality of the evidence sought to be obtained and due diligence upon the part of the movant to obtain such witness or testimony;
(2) The name and residence of such witness, if known, or, if not known, the use of diligence to obtain the same and also facts showing reasonable grounds for belief that the attendance or testimony of such witness will be procured within a reasonable time;
(3) What particular facts the movant believes the witness will prove, and that the movant knows of no other person whose evidence or attendance the movant could have procured at the trial by whom the movant can prove or so fully prove the same facts;
(4) That such witness is not absent by the connivance, consent or procurement of the movant, and such motion is not made for vexation or delay but in good faith for the purpose of obtaining a fair and impartial trial.
Amendment History
Effective until January 1, 2025
Amended Jan. 19, 1973, eff. Sept. 1, 1973; Amended Sept. 28, 1993, eff. Jan. 1, 1994; Amended Mar. 5, 2024, eff. Jan. 1, 2025.
Effective January 1, 2025
Amended Jan. 19, 1973, eff. Sept. 1, 1973; Amended Sept. 28, 1993, eff. Jan. 1, 1994; Amended Mar. 5, 2024, eff. Jan. 1, 2025.
Official Comment
Effective until January 1, 2025
This Rule is the same as Section 94 of the 1943 Code ( Section 510.100, RSMo 1959) except that “at the date to which the action may be continued or set for trial” in Section 94(2) is changed to read “within a reasonable time.” This is the same as prior Rule 65.04.
Effective January 1, 2025
This Rule is the same as Section 94 of the 1943 Code ( Section 510.100, RSMo 1959) except that “at the date to which the action may be continued or set for trial” in Section 94(2) is changed to read “within a reasonable time.” This is the same as prior Rule 65.04.
Plain-English Summary
Rule 65.04 makes sure a continuance based on a missing witness rests on something more than a bare claim that the witness could not be found. The motion must show four things: the facts establishing that the expected testimony is material and that the movant exercised due diligence in trying to obtain the witness or the testimony; the witness’s name and residence, or, if unknown, the diligence used to try to learn it, plus facts giving reasonable grounds to believe the witness’s attendance or testimony can be procured within a reasonable time; the particular facts the movant believes the witness will prove, along with an assurance that no other available witness could prove those same facts as fully; and that the witness is not absent through the movant’s own connivance, consent, or arrangement, and that the motion is made in good faith to secure a fair trial and not for delay.
Together, these requirements force a party seeking this type of continuance to put real specifics on the record — who the witness is, what the witness would say, and why that testimony cannot be replaced or obtained some other way — instead of resting on a general assertion that a witness is unavailable. An amendment effective January 1, 2025 substituted “motion” and “movant” for “application” and “applicant” throughout the rule, a wording change, not a substantive one.
Frequently Asked Questions
What must a continuance motion for an absent witness show?
Four things: the materiality of the expected testimony and the movant’s diligence in trying to obtain it; the witness’s name and residence, or diligence in trying to learn them, plus reasonable grounds to believe the witness will be available soon; the specific facts the witness would prove and that no other witness could prove them as fully; and that the witness is not absent by the movant’s own arrangement and the motion is not for delay.
Why does the rule demand this much detail?
To prevent a continuance from resting on a vague or unsubstantiated claim about a missing witness, and instead require concrete facts the court can evaluate.
What if I don’t know the witness’s address?
You must show the diligence you used to try to find it, along with reasonable grounds to believe the witness’s attendance or testimony will be procured within a reasonable time.
Can I get a continuance if I am really just trying to delay the trial?
No. The rule requires an affirmative showing that the motion is made in good faith for a fair trial, not for vexation or delay, and that the witness is not absent through the movant’s own arrangement.
Has the wording of this rule changed?
Yes, effective January 1, 2025 it replaced “application” and “applicant” with “motion” and “movant,” without changing the underlying requirements.
Source & verification. Rule text and amendment history are
reproduced verbatim from the Missouri State & Federal Court Rules, adopted by the
Supreme Court of Missouri. Last verified July 22, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as: continuance for absent witness missourimissing witness continuance requirements missouridiligence requirement continuance missouriaffidavit for absent witness missouri