Adequate Record on Appeal

State v. Moss, No. M2021-00043-CCA-R3-CD, p. 2-3 (Tenn. Ct. Crim. App. Jan. 31, 2023). 

Where there is failure to provide this Court with an adequate appellate record and failure to prepare a sufficient brief in compliance with the Rules of Appellate Procedure, the issue is waived. State v. Lucy Killebrew, 760 S.W.2d 228, 236 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1988) (waived issue where Defendant had failed to adequately brief issues by making appropriate references to the record, cite authority in support of issues, and/or make appropriate arguments); see also State v. Jason Steven Molthan, No. M2021-01108-CCA-R3-CD, 2022 WL 17245128, at *2 (Tenn. Crim. App. Nov 28, 2022) no. perm app. yet filed (waived issues where Defendant had failed to provide an adequate appellate record and had not prepared a sufficient brief); see also State v. Sheila Marie Lott, No. M2008-02127-CCA- R3-CD, 2010 WL 565664, at *4 (Tenn. Crim. App. Feb 18, 2010) (“Appellant also makes a cursory statement that her sentences should have been run concurrently rather than consecutively. Appellant includes no argument or citations to authority to support the statement. [] Because Appellant has failed to cite any authority for this claim, it is waived.”); see also Dwight Seaton v. State, No. E1999-01312-CCA-R3-CD, 2000 WL 1177462, at *3 (Tenn. Crim. App. Aug 21, 2000) (waived issue where appellate brief contained no citations to appropriate authorities in support of argument).

The appellate has the duty to “have prepared a transcript of such part of the evidence of proceedings as is necessary to convey a fair, accurate and complete account of what transpired with respect to those issues that are the bases of appeal.” Tenn. R. App. P. 24(b). In the absence of an adequate record, we presume that the trial court’s judgments were correct. State v. Richardson, 875 S.W.2d 671, 674 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1993); see Thompson v. State, 958 S.W.2d 156, 171 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997) (concluding that this court was unable to determine whether the trial court erred in denying the petitioner’s request for funds for a psychologist or psychiatrist and an investigator when the transcript of the hearing on the motion was not included in the appellate record). “However, if the record provides an adequate basis for review, this court may reach the merits of an issue with the presumption that the missing part of the record would support the trial court’s decision.” State v. Shaughn Walker, No. W2019-00751-CCA-R3-CD, 2021 WL 4496508, at *10 (Tenn. Crim. App. Oct. 10, 2021), perm. app. denied (Tenn. Feb. 23, 2022) (concluding that although the transcript of the hearing on the ex parte motion for additional funding was not included in the appellate record, the record includes the trial court’s articulation of its reasoning for denying additional funding and is, therefore, adequate for review, with the presumption that any missing portion would support the trial court’s decision); see State v. Jones, 568 S.W.3d 101, 137 (Tenn. 2019) (noting that the defendant failed to include a transcript of the ex parte hearing on expert funding but holding that, on the basis of the record provided, the defendant had not established particularized need).

The appellant has a duty to prepare a record that conveys “a fair, accurate and complete account of what transpired with respect to those issues that are the bases of appeal.” Tenn. R. App. P. 24(b). “In the absence of an adequate record on appeal, we must presume that the trial court’s ruling was supported by the evidence.” State v. Bibbs, 806 S.W.2d 786, 790 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1991) (citations omitted).