State v. Skaggs
| Decision Date | 01 March 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 77-720,77-720 |
| Citation | 372 N.E.2d 1355,53 Ohio St.2d 162,7 O.O.3d 243 |
| Parties | , 7 O.O.3d 243 The STATE of Ohio, Appellee, v. SKAGGS, Appellant. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
The failure of a recording device to completely reproduce all of the proceedings of a trial in a petty offense case is not prejudicial per se.
Appellant, John A. Skaggs, was arrested for disorderly conduct, in violation of R.C. 2917.11(B)(2), and criminal damaging, in violation of R.C. 2909.06(A) (1), both petty offenses. Appellant was tried by a jury in the First District County Court of Greene County, Ohio, and convicted on each charge. Appellant was sentenced and fined accordingly.
Appellant made no request before trial for a recording of the proceedings. The trial court, however, undertook to have the proceedings tape recorded. These tape recordings were found to be faulty, in that it was difficult for the court reporter to transcribe the record. The court reporter stated that she could not certify that the transcription taken from the tapes was complete and accurate.
Appellant submitted no statement of the evidence or proceedings as allowed under App.R. 9(C).
The Court of Appeals for Greene County affirmed the judgment of the trial court.
The record of this case is now before this court for review and final determination pursuant to the certification by the Court of Appeals that its judgment is in conflict with the judgment of the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County in White v. White (1977), 50 Ohio App.2d 263, 362 N.E.2d 1013.
Michael DeWine, Pros. Atty. Xenia, and Joe R. Fodal, Fairborn, for appellee.
James P. Jones, Dayton, for appellant.
The question on appeal is whether in a petty offense case, when the trial court undertakes the tape recording of all proceedings under Crim.R. 22 and the court reporter is unable to transcribe from the tapes some of the proceedings, there is reversible error as a matter of law based upon the inadequacy of the record.
Crim.R. 22 states, in part:
The Court of Appeals held that "on the whole, the proceeding is faithfully reproduced." It held further that:
"* * * (i)n most cases, the nature of the response can be ascertained from the context and we note that the worst example of this failure to transcribe what was said occurs on pages 299 and 300 where counsel for the appellant was arguing a motion to strike certain testimony, which was admissible."
The burden to show the relevance of omissions or deficiencies must be placed upon appellant within the framework of claimed error. Appellant has not met this burden. The proper procedure was available under the provisions of App.R. 9(C) and should have been pursued by appellant.
App.R. 9(C) states in part:
"If no report of the evidence or proceedings at a hearing or trial was made, or if a transcript is unavailable, the appellant may prepare a statement of the evidence or proceedings from the best available means,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State Of Ohio v. Perry
...This is necessarily so because an appellant bears the burden of showing error by reference to matters in the record. See State v. Skaggs (1978), 53 Ohio St. 2d 162. This principle is recognized in App.R. 9(B), which provides, in part, that ' * * *the appellant shall in writing order from th......
-
State v. Bates
...error on the record. Knapp v. Edwards Laboratories , 61 Ohio St.2d 197, 199, 400 N.E.2d 384 (1980), citing State v. Skaggs , 53 Ohio St.2d 162, 163, 372 N.E.2d 1355 (1978). Therefore, to obtain a reversal of the court of appeals’ judgment, Bates must establish that the trial court lacked th......
-
State v. Jones
...107, 752 N.E.2d 937 (2001) ; Knapp v. Edwards Laboratories , 61 Ohio St.2d 197, 200, 400 N.E.2d 384 (1980) ; State v. Skaggs , 53 Ohio St.2d 162, 163-164, 372 N.E.2d 1355 (1978).{¶ 43} It is possible to cherry-pick a few of these cases in which the court gave alternative or additional reaso......
-
State v. Adams, 2009 Ohio 6491 (Ohio App. 12/8/2009)
...so because an appellant bears the burden of showing error by reference to matters in the record." Id., citing State v. Skaggs (1978), 53 Ohio St.2d 162, 372 N.E.2d 1355; see, also, App.R. 9(B). "When portions of the transcript necessary for resolution of assigned errors are omitted from the......