Opinion ID: 1699278
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 31

Heading: The incomplete record denied defendant the right to appellate review.

Text: Defendant claims he has been denied his right to appellate review as a result of at least fifty-four off-record bench conferences and at least one off-record charge conference during many of which the trial [court] addressed matters critical to an adequate review of the proceedings below. Brief for Appellant, p. 85. This Court previously considered the alleged inadequacies in the record when it entertained defendant's Motion to Remand this Matter to the District Court for Purposes of Reconstructing What Occurred During Off-the-record Proceedings and to Suspend the Briefing Schedule Pending Completion of the Record. We denied the motion on November 7, 2003, ruling: The motion to remand this case to the district court for purposes of reconstructing the record with regard to unrecorded bench conferences and/or to waive the contemporaneous objection rule with regard to rulings that may have been made during the unrecorded conferences is hereby denied. Defendant fails to show the unrecorded conferences prevented [him] from presenting [ ] relevant evidence, or that prejudice resulted from the absence in the record of the substance of the conferences. Brumfield, 737 So.2d at 669-70. As noted elsewhere, the record reveals defense counsel did, in fact, lodge numerous objections to various trial court rulings and each of those objections was preserved for appellate review and is treated on its merits. This argument lacks merit.