COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NO. 59951 STATE OF OHIO : : Plaintiff-appellee : : JOURNAL ENTRY -vs- : AND : OPINION BRUCE EARL EDDINGS : : Defendant-appellant : : DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT : OF DECISION : MARCH 12, 1992 CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING : Criminal appeal from Court of Common Pleas : Case No. CR-227486 JUDGMENT : AFFIRMED DATE OF JOURNALIZATION : APPEARANCES: For plaintiff-appellee: For defendant-appellant: STEPHANIE TUBBS-JONES HYMAN FRIEDMAN CUYAHOGA COUNTY PROSECUTOR CUYAHOGA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER BRIAN McGRAW, ASST. WARREN L. McCLELLAND, ASST. Justice Center - 8th Floor Marion Building, Room 307 1200 Ontario Street 1276 West Third Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 Cleveland, Ohio 44113 J.F. CORRIGAN, J., - 2 - Appellant, Bruce Eddings, appeals his conviction for gambling. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm. I. Appellant states in his brief that he is appealing his convictions in criminal case nos. 214730 and 227486. Appellant has not perfected an appeal in case no. 214730. Therefore, we address his argument only as it pertains to case no. 227486. On June 6, 1988, appellant was indicted in case no. 227486 for two counts of gambling in violation of R.C. 2915.02 and two counts of possessing criminal tools in violation of R.C. 2923.24. Each count contained a violence specification. Appellant plead guilty to the gambling charges on August 3, 1988, and the other charges were nolled. The trial court sentenced appellant to a term of one and one half to five years incarceration on each count and further found appellant to be in violation of his probation in case no. 214730. The trial court reinstated the sentence in case no. 214730 and ordered that it be served consecutively to the sentence in case no. 227486. On June 20, 1990, this court granted appellant's motion for a delayed appeal in case no. 227486. The transcript of appellant's plea hearing was apparently destroyed in a fire at the Justice Center on December 28, 1988. However, the foregoing facts were set forth in a statement of the proceedings filed by appellant and approved by the trial judge pursuant to App. R. 9(C). - 3 - II. Appellant sets forth the following as his sole assignment of error: "THE APPELLANT WAS DENIED EFFECTIVE PROSECUTION OF HIS APPEAL AS A RIGHT, DUE TO THE DESTRUCTION OF THE COURT REPORTER'S NOTES OF HIS PROCEEDINGS IN VIOLATION OF HIS RIGHTS TO DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION." Appellant filed a proposed statement of the proceedings on March 15, 1991. In that statement, appellant set forth the charges in the indictment, appellant's guilty plea, and the court's sentence. This statement was approved by the prosecution without alteration, and by the trial court without reservation. App. R. 9(C) provides in pertinent part that: "If no report of the evidence or proceedings at a hearing or trial was made, or if a transcript was unavailable, the appellant may prepare a statement of the evidence or proceedings from the best available means, including his recollection." Furthermore, in the absence of a record or transcript the proceedings at trial are presumed correct. State v. Brown (1988), 38 Ohio St. 3d 305. Appellant contends that the App. R. 9(C) statement he proposed provides this court with an inadequate record to review his guilty plea. Appellant cites this court's decision in State v. Polk (March 7, 1991), Cuyahoga App. No. 57511, unreported, as authority for his proposition. This case is quite different, however, from Polk. In Polk the trial judge expressed severe reservations in approving the App. R. 9(C) statement due to his - 4 - lack of recollection of the facts of the case. In addition, neither party in Polk could recall the legal issues raised at trial. In the case sub judice, appellant prepared the proposed App. R. 9(C) statement without reference to any alleged defects in the plea hearing. Appellant was afforded by App. R. 9(C) an opportunity to place any issue into the record that would help effectuate his appeal. No objections were made by the state, and the trial judge approved the proposal without reservation. Appellant, therefore, is able to rely solely on his version of the facts. The App. R. 9(C) statement provided to this court gives us no reason to believe that appellant was denied his constitutional rights at the plea hearing. We are bound by Brown, supra, and must presume the regularity of the proceedings in all other regards. Therefore, we find that appellant's assignment of error is not well taken. Judgment affirmed. - 5 - It is ordered that appellee recover of appellant its costs herein taxed. The Court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal. It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this Court directing the Court of Common Pleas to carry this judgment into execution. The defendant's conviction having been affirmed, any bail pending appeal is terminated. Case remanded to the trial court for execution of sentence. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. NAHRA, P.J., and *ECONOMUS, J., CONCUR. (*Judge Peter Economus, Mahoning County Common Pleas Court, Sitting by Assignment.) JUDGE JOHN F. CORRIGAN N.B. This entry is made pursuant to the third sentence of Rule 22(D), Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure. This is an announcement of decision (see Rule 26). Ten (10) days from the date hereof, this document will be stamped to indicate journalization, at which time it will become the judgment and order of the court and time period for review will begin to run. .