People v. Ray Supplementing
the Record on Appeal
Issues: Mr. Ray sought to supplement the record on appeal
with off-the-record happenings – bench conferences, interactions of court staff
with the jury, etc. Why the Court of Appeals chose to publish this decision at
all cannot be discerned. It reads more like directions for appellate lawyers; a
how-to or something like “Here’s How You Properly Supplement The Record – 101.”
Given how the Court of Appeals buries reversals of convictions by not
publishing those decisions, why now choose to publish this five-page how-to on
amending the record on appeal?
Court of Appeals tip: No matter how annoyed the Court, the prosecutor, or the reporter get, do everything on the record – including the
instructions conference, all bench conferences, and all directions given to the
jury by the trial court. According to the opinion, defense counsel did not
request that bench conferences be on the record. The trial court with the help
of the defense and prosecution recreated the bench conferences. Mr. Ray then
sought clarification of the recreated record. The Court of Appeals declined the
request, “Ray now seeks clarification of the trial
court's order. We deny that request and further decline to supplement the
record with any reconstructed bench conference. The transcripts show that trial
counsel could have had any bench conference recorded upon request. Under these
circumstances, we cannot conclude that the unrecorded conferences were “omitted
from the record by error or accident,” within the meaning of C.A.R. 10(e).”
No comments:
Post a Comment