IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT NASHVILLE

February 8, 2011 Session

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. ERIKA Y. JOHNSON

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Williamson County

No. I-CR013149-B Jeffrey S. Bivins, Judge

No. M2010-01176-CCA-R3-CD - Filed May 11, 2011

The Defendant, Erika Y. Johnson, appeals as of right from the Williamson County Circuit

Court’s revocation of her probation and order that she serve the remainder of her sentence

in confinement. The Defendant contends that the trial court erred by ordering her to serve

the remainder of her sentence in confinement. Following our review, we affirm the judgment

of the trial court.

Tenn. R. App. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit Court is Affirmed.

D. KELLY THOMAS, JR., J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which JOHN EVERETT

WILLIAMS and CAMILLE R. MCMULLEN, JJ., joined.

Erika Y. Johnson, Madison, Tennessee, pro se.

Robert E. Cooper, Jr., Attorney General and Reporter; David H. Findley, Senior Counsel;

Kim R. Helper, District Attorney General; and Sean Bernard Duddy, Assistant District

Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

OPINION

On January 14, 2008, the Defendant was indicted on one count of simple possession

of marijuana. The Defendant subsequently pled guilty to the charge on September 4, 2008,

and was sentenced to 11 months and 29 days to be served on probation. On November 1,

2008, a probation violation complaint was issued against the Defendant alleging that she had

failed to pay court costs and failed a drug test. The Defendant admitted the violation and the

trial court revoked and reinstated the probation for 11 months and 29 days with the

requirement that the Defendant serve 20 days in the county jail. On December 21, 2009, a

second probation violation complaint was issued against the Defendant alleging that she had
failed to pay court costs and tested positive for marijuana and benzodiazepines. The

Defendant again admitted the violation but requested a hearing regarding her sentence.

Following the hearing, the trial court ordered the Defendant to serve the remainder of her

sentence in confinement.

The Defendant contends that the trial court erred by ordering her to serve the

remainder of her sentence in confinement. The Defendant argues that being “incarcerated

is inappropriate and unnecessary” for her because she regularly reports to her probation

officer, “has passed recent drug screens,” and “[i]n two years of probation” she “has been out

of trouble with the law.” The State responds that the Defendant has waived this issue by

failing to provide a complete record for appeal. Alternatively, the State respondsthat the trial

court did not err by ordering the Defendant to serve the remainder of her sentence in

confinement.

The record on appeal contains only the “technical record” and does not include a

transcript of the probation revocation hearing. Without a transcript of the hearing, we cannot

conclude that the trial court erred by ordering the Defendant to serve the remainder of her

sentence in confinement. It is the Defendant’s duty to prepare the record “as is necessary to

convey a fair, accurate and complete account of what transpired with respect to those issues

which are the bases of appeal.” Tenn. R. App. P. 24(b). A record that “is incomplete and

does not contain a transcript of the proceedings relevant to an issue presented for review, or

portions of the record upon which the party relies” precludes an appellate court from

considering the issue. State v. Ballard, 855 S.W.2d 557, 560-61 (Tenn. 1993) (citing State

v. Roberts, 755 S.W.2d 833, 836 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1988)). When a party fails to provide

an adequate record on appeal “this court must presume that the trial court’s rulings were

supported by sufficient evidence.” State v. Oody, 823 S.W.2d 554, 559 (Tenn. Crim. App.

1991) (citing Vermilye v. State, 584 S.W.2d 226, 230 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1979)). The

Defendant has failed to properly preserve this issue for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the

judgment of the trial court.

In consideration of the foregoing and the record as a whole, the judgment of the trial

court is affirmed.

_________________________________

D. KELLY THOMAS, JR., JUDGE

-2-