What is the test for a motion to grant a continuance against a defendant who failed to obtain a certificate of probable cause?

Given that the focus of both arguments was primarily on defendant's dissatisfaction with his plea, coupled with the fact that a renewed motion to suppress had already been made at the time of the argument, it is clear that the primary (if not the sole) purpose for the continuance was to allow defendant time to explore withdrawing his plea. This is an attack on the validity of the plea. Accordingly, because defendant failed to obtain a certificate of probable cause, he may not challenge the trial court's ruling on appeal.² (See People v. Emery, supra, 140 Cal.App.4th at pp. 564-565.) His challenge to the denial of the continuance is not cognizable.