Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Nashville
Assigned on Briefs March 21, 2017
from the Circuit Court for Rutherford County No. F-73282
David M. Bragg, Judge
Defendant, Roosevelt Pitts III was convicted of robbery,
three counts of reckless endangerment, leaving the scene of
an accident, and vandalism. The trial court sentenced the
Defendant to an effective eighteen years in prison. On
appeal, the Defendant argues that the State discriminated
against prospective jurors by excusing them for race-based
reasons and that the State engaged in prosecutorial
misconduct during closing arguments. The State contends that
the Defendant has waived these issues by providing this court
with an insufficient record. Because the record provided for
review is insufficient to allow us to consider the issues
raised, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.
R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgments of the Circuit
L. Melton, District Public Defender, and Russell N. (Rusty)
Perkins, Assistant Public Defender, for the appellant,
Roosevelt Pitts, III.
Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter;
Alexander C. Vey, Assistant Attorney General; Jennings H.
Jones, District Attorney General; and Shawn Puckett,
Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State
Everett Williams, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in
which Timothy L. Easter and J. Ross Dyer, JJ., joined.
EVERETT WILLIAMS, JUDGE
appellate record does not contain transcripts of the jury
selection, trial, or sentencing hearing, but we are able to
glean the following facts from the technical record. The
Defendant was indicted for one count of robbery, two counts
of aggravated assault, one count of reckless endangerment,
one count of leaving the scene of a property damage accident,
one count of vandalism over $10, 000, and one count of
carjacking. Following a jury trial, the Defendant was found
guilty of one count of robbery, three counts of reckless
endangerment, one count of leaving the scene of an accident,
and one count of vandalism over $1, 000. The Defendant was
sentenced to ten years in prison for robbery, four years in
prison for each reckless endangerment conviction, eleven
months and twenty-nine days in prison for leaving the scene
of an accident, and eight years in prison for vandalism. The
trial court ran the reckless endangerment, leaving the scene
of an accident, and vandalism sentences concurrently to each
other and consecutively to the robbery sentence, for an
effective sentence of eighteen years. After a hearing, the
trial court denied the Defendant's motion for a new
appeal, the Defendant argues that the State purposefully
discriminated against prospective jurors during jury
selection who were African-American in violation of
Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986). The
Defendant also argues that the State engaged in prosecutorial
misconduct by giving improper closing arguments. The State
contends that the Defendant waived appellate review of his
arguments by failing to provide this court with a sufficient
appellant bears the burden of preparing a full and complete
record for appellate review. State v. Bunch, 646
S.W.2d 158, 160 (Tenn. 1983); see Tenn. R. App. P.
24(b). "What is in the record sets the boundaries for
what the appellate courts may review, and thus only evidence
contained therein can be considered." State v.
Bobadilla, 181 S.W.3d 641, 643 (Tenn. 2005) (citation
omitted). When no evidence is preserved in the record for
review, the appellate court may not consider the issue.
State v. Goodwin, 909 S.W.2d 35, 43 (Tenn. Crim.
App. 1995). Where an argument is noted but not transcribed
and the record is missing a transcript of the proceedings
relevant to an issue presented for review or portions of the
record upon which the party relies, appellate review of the
argument is waived. See State v. Mickens, 123 S.W.3d
355, 387 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2003) (citing State v.
Ballard, 855 S.W.2d 557, 560-61 (Tenn. 1993)). Given a
record that lacks any transcripts to provide a basis for
proper review, the appellate court must presume that the
trial court's determination of the issue was correct.
State v. Griffis, 964 S.W.2d 577, 592-93 (Tenn.
Crim. App. 1997).
record provided to this court for appellate review includes
the warrants, the indictments, the Defendant's motion for
a new trial, his addendum to the motion for a new trial, the
trial court's order denying the motion for a new trial,
the transcript of the proceedings on the motion for a new
trial, the judgments, and the notice of appeal. The record
ultimately does not include the portions relevant to the