What is the test for granting a continuance to allow an attorney to prepare for trial?

On direct appeal, this court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by granting only a two-day continuance to allow the appellant's newly-substituted attorney to prepare for trial because a further extension was not requested. See United States v. Hernandez-Valenzuela, 932 F.2d 803, 804 (9th Cir.1991) (per curiam). To the extent that appellant continues to assert that the district court's failure to grant more than a two-day continuance was an abuse of discretion, this court's prior ruling is the law of the case and we decline to reconsider the issue. See United States v. Mills, 810 F.2d 907, 909 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 832 (1987).