COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NO. 68891 IN THE MATTER OF: : ACCELERATED CASE MARCO PARRA : : Plaintiff-Appellee : : JOURNAL ENTRY -vs- : AND : OPINION : : Defendant-Appellant : PER CURIAM : DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT OF DECISION: NOVEMBER 22, 1995 CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM JUVENILE COURT DIVISION CASE NO. 9416074 JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED. DATE OF JOURNALIZATION: APPEARANCES: For Plaintiff-Appellee: STEPHANIE TUBBS JONES Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney PATRICK J. McCARTHY (#0061952) Assistant Prosecuting Attorney The Justice Center 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 For Defendant-Appellant: JAMES A. DRAPER Cuyahoga County Public Defender BY: DONALD GREEN (#0039202) Assistant Public Defender 1200 West Third Street N.W. 100 Lakeside Place Cleveland, Ohio 44113-1569 PER CURIAM: Marco Parra appeals from his adjudication of delinquency and commitment to the Ohio Department of Youth Services. Parra raises the following assignment of error: THE TRIAL COURT'S ACCEPTANCE OF AN ADMISSION TO THE AMENDED COMPLAINT WAS IN VIOLATION OF RULE 29 OF THE RULES OF JUVENILE PROCEDURE AND THE UNITED STATES AND OHIO CONSTITUTIONS. Parra argues that the trial court erred in accepting his admission because the record is silent. Parra, however, has failed to provide a record of his hearing. A distinction exists between a silent record and no record. An appellant bears the burden of providing a record for appeal. Knapp v. Edwards Laboratories (1980), 61 Ohio St.2d 197, 199. In the absence of the necessary record, a reviewing court must presume regularity. Id. In State v. Drake (1991), 73 Ohio App.3d 640, 647, this court stated that: If a transcript is "unavailable," an appellant has an obligation to provide a complete record pursuant to App.R. 9(C), (D) or (E). The appellant must comply with App.R. 9(C) in his or her direct appeal instead of asking for a new trial. State v. Polk (Mar. 7, 1991), Cuyahoga App. No. 57511, unreported, at 4, 1991 WL 30250, citing State v. Griffin (May 9, 1991), Cuyahoga App. No. 57673, unreported, 1991 WL 76021. The court should consider granting a new trial only after all reasonable efforts to comply with App.R. 9(C) have been made. Id. This court in Polk reversed and remanded the trial court's decision and ordered a new trial because the transcript was unavailable and a statement of proceeding could not have been compiled. Polk, supra, at 5. The record reflected that the appellant made a good faith effort to reconstruct the record, in that his - 3 - appellate counsel spoke with appellant and trial counsel but could not recall much of the testimony, legal issues and procedural steps at trial. Id. at 4-5. Moreover, the trial judge admitted he did not have an independent recollection of the testimony and stated that it was therefore impossible for him to make an intelligent ruling on the App.R. 9(C) state- ment. Hence, we concluded the trial judge abused his discretion in accepting verbatim the prosecutor's version of the trial when there was no way of knowing if it was proper or accurate. However, in this case, there is no indica- tion that defendant made any effort, let alone a good faith one, to reconstruct the record of his plea hearing. Defendant did not file a statement of the proceedings pursuant to App.R. 9(C). As such, in the absence of a record, the proceedings at the trial are presumed correct. State v. Brown (1988), 38 Ohio St.3d 305, 528 N.E.2d 523. See, also, In the matter of Hughes (Aug. 4, 1994), Cuyahoga App. No. 64910, unreported (Court presumed regularity in juvenile defendant's admission to complaint). Here, Parra has made no attempt to provide a record of his hearing. Consequently, we presume regularity. Accordingly, Parra's assignment of error is not well taken. Judgment affirmed. - 4 - 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 Juvenile Court Division 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. LEO M. SPELLACY, PRESIDING JUDGE JAMES M. PORTER, JUDGE JOSEPH J. NAHRA, JUDGE 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 .