☢ test - Í

Jones v. State, 318 Ga.App. 614, 734 S.E.2d 450 (November 16, 2012). Conviction for trafficking in methamphetamine affirmed; trial court properly supplemented record on appeal with defendant’s written statement, which was properly admitted into evidence at bench trial but omitted from the record. “‘If anything material to either party is omitted from the record on appeal or is misstated therein, ... the trial court, ... on a proper suggestion or of its own initiative, may direct that the omission or misstatement shall be corrected and, if necessary, that a supplemental record shall be certified and transmitted by the clerk of the trial court.’ OCGA § 5–6–41(f). Indeed, ‘[w]here the correctness of the record is called into question the matter is to be resolved by the trial court.’ (Citations and punctuation omitted .) State v. Nejad, 286 Ga. 695, 697(1), 690 S.E.2d 846 (2010). Under the circumstances of this case, the trial court was authorized to correct the record by supplementing it with the inadvertently omitted statement of the defendant.” McFarlane v. State, 291 Ga. 345, 729 S.E.2d 349 (July 2, 2012). Malice murder and related convictions affirmed; defendant wasn’t “entitled to a new trial because voir dire was not recorded as required by OCGA § 5–6–41(a).” “It appears that McFarlane failed to request that voir dire be transcribed, and OCGA § 5–6–41(a) does not require that voir dire be reported in all felony cases. State v. Graham, 246 Ga. 341, 342, 271 S.E.2d 627 (1980). It is mandatory that voir dire be made part of the record in cases where the death penalty is imposed, which is not the circumstance here. Id., citing Owens v. State, 233 Ga. 869, 214 S.E.2d 173 (1975). … In any event, McFarlane's complaint is founded on the tenuous premise that an examination of the voir dire proceedings would have some bearing on or relationship to the subsequent arrest of the juror. Merely asserting a general unspecified hope of reversible error during voir dire is insufficient to warrant a new trial on the ground that a transcript of the proceeding should have been made so as to “accommodate a search for error now buried in unrecorded history.” Primas v. State, 231 Ga.App. 861, 501 S.E.2d 28 (1998).” Defendant showed no connection between the unrecorded voir dire and the subsequent mid-trial arrest of one of the jurors “on outstanding traffic-related charges.” The juror was replaced by an alternate, with no apparent prejudice to defendant. Accord, Brinkley v. State , 320 Ga.App. 275, 739 S.E.2d 703 (March 11, 2013). Glass v. State, 289 Ga. 542, 712 S.E.2d 851 (July 11, 2011). Felony murder and related convictions affirmed; Court of Appeals couldn’t review trial court’s failure to set pre-trial bond where defendant failed to file transcript of bond hearing. Although “‘OCGA § 17–8–5(a) requires the trial judge to ensure that the testimony in all felony trials is taken down.’ Ivory v. State, 199 Ga.App. 283(1), 405 S.E.2d 90 (1991), … the State's duty to request the court reporter to transcribe the reported testimony in a felony conviction has no time limit and thus cannot relieve an appellant from a felony conviction of his statutory duty to ‘cause the transcript to be prepared and filed as provided by Code Section 5–6–41 ....’ OCGA § 5–6–42.” Thomas v. State, 308 Ga.App. 309, 707 S.E.2d 870 (March 9, 2011). In defendants’ prosecution for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, and related offenses, denial of plea in bar based on double jeopardy affirmed; defendants’ failure to file trial transcript precludes review of whether prosecutor intentionally goaded mistrial. “OCGA § 17-8-5(b) provides that ‘[i]n the event that a mistrial results from any cause in the trial of a defendant charged with the commission of a felony, the presiding judge may, in his discretion, either with or without any application of the defendant or state's counsel, order that a brief or transcript of the testimony in the case be duly filed by the court reporter in the office of the clerk of the superior court in which the mistrial occurred.’ It clear from the record here that the trial court chose not to order that the trial transcripts be filed. [fn: We note that the appellants do not claim that they are indigent and did not move for a free transcript. See Miller v. State, 231 Ga.App. 869, 869(1) (501 S.E.2d 42) (1998). ] It was therefore appellants' responsibility to pay for and obtain the transcripts for filing with the clerk of the trial court. See id. Because the appellants have failed to have the trial transcripts filed with the trial court, and they are essential to this court's review of the issues related to the appellants' plea in bar, we must assume the trial court's judgment was correct and affirm. See Quarterman v. Lee, 291 Ga.App. 603, 603-603 (662 S.E.2d 234) (2008); Wright v. State, 215 Ga.App. 569, 570(2) (452 S.E.2d 118) (1994).” Smith v. State, 288 Ga. 348, 703 S.E.2d 629 (November 8, 2010). Defendants’ felony murder and related convictions affirmed; trial court properly refused “to admit into evidence at the motion for new trial hearing a Court TV video recording of the prosecutor's closing argument. … [T]o the extent that [defendant] wished to use the video to supplement the official trial transcript and shed additional light on the trial proceedings, she failed to follow the proper procedures to make the video part of the official court record. See OCGA § 5-6-41(f) (‘Where any party contends that the transcript or record does not truly or fully disclose what transpired in the trial court and the parties are unable to agree thereon, the trial court shall set the matter down for a hearing with notice to both parties and resolve the difference so as to make the record conform to the truth’). Accordingly, we find no abuse of discretion in the trial court's decision to exclude the videotape.”