Opinion ID: 575149
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Sufficiency of the Reconstructed Record

Text: 13 As we recently stated, [a] criminal defendant has a right to a record on appeal which includes a complete transcript of the proceedings at trial. United States v. Carrillo, 902 F.2d 1405, 1409 (9th Cir.1990). When a complete transcript cannot be produced, however, automatic reversal is not necessarily required. Id., see also Bergerco, U.S.A. v. Shipping Corp. of India, Ltd., 896 F.2d 1210, 1217 (9th Cir.1990) (in civil, as well as criminal cases, the lack of a complete transcript does not automatically warrant reversal). Rather, pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 10(c), the district court may attempt to reconstruct the missing transcript in order to provide an adequate record on appeal. Once the record is reconstructed, the lack of an original transcript will only necessitate a new trial when the trial court's certification that the transcript is accurate and complete is clearly erroneous. Carrillo, 902 F.2d at 1410. 14 There is considerable evidence which supports the version of events ultimately adopted by the district court. According to the Assistant United States Attorney's declaration, all parties involved in the proceeding, including Regino-Delgado's former counsel, indicated that Judge Real conducted a thorough examination of Regino-Delgado before accepting his guilty plea. The minute order entered immediately following the hearing states, Court questions the defendant regarding his plea and finds it knowledgeable and voluntary.... It is reasonable to conclude from the declaration submitted by the Assistant United States Attorney that had Judge Real failed to comply with Rule 11, Regino-Delgado's counsel who then represented him would have brought this omission to the attention of the court. This did not happen. Moreover, at the sentencing hearing, despite ample opportunity to do so, Regino-Delgado raised no objection with regard to his change of plea. 15 In contrast to the evidence presented by the government, Regino-Delgado submitted only his declaration. In this declaration he asserted that he changed his plea to guilty because he was being forced to change the plea. The record, however, belies this. At his sentencing hearing, Regino-Delgado stated: I want to say I know I committed a crime and I am guilty of what I did.... 16 We conclude that Judge Real's decision to accept the government's version of the events at the change-of-plea hearing was not clearly erroneous. The reconstructed record is sufficient to allow us to review Regino-Delgado's claims of error. 17