COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NO. 69887 IN RE: DAMIAN ADAMS, A MINOR : : Appellant : : JOURNAL ENTRY : AND : OPINION : : : : : DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT : SEPTEMBER 12, 1996 OF DECISION : CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING : Civil appeal from Juvenile Court : Case No. 9513429 JUDGMENT : AFFIRMED DATE OF JOURNALIZATION : APPEARANCES: For plaintiff-appellant: For defendant-appellee: DONALD GREEN, ESQ. VICTOR P. RAUSER, ESQ. Assistant Public Defender Assistant County Prosecutor 100 Lakeside Place Justice Center-8th Floor 1200 West Third Street 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, OH 44113 Cleveland, OH 44113 Juvenile Court Clerk's Office 2163 East 22nd Street Cleveland, OH 44115 - 2 - PATTON, J. The issue presented in this appeal is whether the absence of a transcript of proceedings from a juvenile court constitutes a per se violation of a juvenile's rights under Juv.R. 29(D). Appellant Damian Adams appeared before a referee in the juvenile court on charges of domestic violence, a fourth degree felony if committed by an adult. The proceedings were not recorded. The record contains a referee's report which has the following notation: The complaint was read and the referee explained legal rights, procedures, and possible dispositions pursuant to Juvenile Rule 29. The parties (x) waive ( ) have counsel. Appellant first argues the juvenile court violated his right to counsel because the record fails to establish appellant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel. We addressed this precise issue in In re East (1995), 105 Ohio App.3d 221, 224. At the time we considered East, neither R.C. 2151.35(A) nor Juv.R. 37(A) required proceedings in juvenile court to be recorded. Although Juv.R. 37 has been amended, effective - 3 - 1 July 1, 1996, to require a record of proceedings , the previous version of the rule was in effect at the time appellant entered his admission and we expressly base our decision today on the former version of the rule. In East, we recognized that we are not permitted to presume a valid waiver of constitutional rights from a silent record; nevertheless, we expressed our reluctance "to require a transcript to be made in juvenile proceedings, when the rules explicitly do not require one unless a request is made." Id. at 224. We went on to find that the state may prove a valid waiver despite the absence of a transcript. In this case, the referee's report contained a notation that she advised appellant of his rights in the presence of his mother. We have found such a statement a sufficient indication of a valid waiver of counsel under similar circumstances. In re East, supra, at 225, citing In 1 An amendment to Juv.R. 37, effective July 1, 1996, now requires he juvenile court to record proceedings. Subsection (A) of the rule states: "Record of proceedings. The juvenile court shall make a record of adjudicatory and dispositional proceedings in abuse, neglect, dependent, unruly and delinquent cases; and proceedings before magistrates. In all other proceedings governed by these rules, a record shall be made upon request of a party or upon motion of the court. The record shall be taken in shorthand, stenotype, or by any other adequate mechanical, electronic or video recording device. The Staff Note indicates the making of a record is mandatory in adjudicatory cases, and includes the receiving of any admissions. - 4 - re Rader (June 17, 1993), Cuyahoga App. No. 62655, unreported, at 10. Appellant next argues the juvenile court erred by accepting his admission because the record does not demonstrate he waived his rights. The absence of a printed transcript of the admissions hearing precludes us from determining the validity of appellant's admission under Juv.R. 29(D). In re Parra (Nov. 22, 1995), Cuyahoga App. No. 68891, unreported; In re Hughes (Aug. 4, 1994), Cuyahoga App. No. 64910, unreported. The assigned errors are overruled. 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 Juvenile Court to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. JAMES D. SWEENEY, P.J. DYKE, J., CONCUR JUDGE JOHN T. PATTON N.B. This entry is an announcement of the court's decision. See App.R. 22(B), 22(D) and 26(A); Loc.App.R. 27. This decision will be journalized and will become the judgment and order of the court pursuant to App.R. 22(E) unless a motion for reconsideration with supporting brief, per App. R. 26(A), is filed within ten (10) days of the announcement of the court's decision. The time period for review by the Supreme Court of Ohio shall begin to run upon the journalization of this court's announcement of decision by the .