Johnson v. State, 302 Ga. 188

Defendant Craig Johnson was convicted of malice murder and related offenses for the 2008 stabbing death of Nicole Judge; he was sentenced to life in prison.
The original verbatim trial transcript was destroyed in a 2011 fire at the court reporter’s house before it was completed.
The State produced a 14‑page, double‑spaced narrative re-creation based on the judge’s notes and prosecutors’/investigator’s notes; Johnson submitted minor edits but disputed completeness.
The trial court accepted the re-created transcript as the official record and summarily denied Johnson’s amended motion for new trial; Johnson appealed to the Supreme Court of Georgia.
The re-created transcript omitted detailed accounts of cross-examination, bases for 14 evidentiary objections, the content of curative instructions, and the substance of the jury charge and charge conference.
The Supreme Court held the re-created transcript was insufficient to permit meaningful appellate review and reversed the denial of a new trial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Johnson)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Adequacy of re-created transcript	Re-creation is incomplete and too summary to identify errors on appeal	Re-creation (14-page narrative) is adequate; record shows overwhelming evidence of guilt	Held for Johnson: the narrative was not sufficiently complete for appeal; new trial required
State's burden when original transcript lost	State must produce an adequate alternative transcript; defendant should participate	Re-creation under OCGA §§ 5-6-41(f),(g) suffices; trial judge’s adoption final	Held: State bears burden to produce adequate transcript; judge’s selection of content is final on correctness but appellate review can assess completeness
Whether missing portions are harmless given strength of evidence	Missing record prevents assessment of possible errors or prejudice despite strong evidence	Any errors would be harmless because evidence (esp. videotaped statement) was overwhelming	Held: Court will not assume harmlessness; cannot evaluate harm without an adequate transcript
Need for additional fact-finding to re-create transcript	Re-creation should include witness testimony or hearings when large/material gaps exist	Trial court relied on judicial and prosecutor notes; no further testimony required	Held: Where substantial portions are missing, re-creation by interviewing or calling trial participants often necessary; here the State’s process was insufficient

Wilson v. State, 246 Ga. 672 (right to a complete transcript on felony appeal)
Wade v. State, 231 Ga. 131 (State duty to file transcript after guilty verdict)
Sheard v. State, 300 Ga. 117 (missing transcript may require new trial if adequate re-creation prevents review)
Dunlap v. State, 291 Ga. 51 (what parts of trial need transcription; voir dire and opening/closing not always required)
Mosley v. State, 300 Ga. 521 (re-creation adequate where witnesses and counsel testified at re-creation hearing)
Hardy v. United States, 375 U.S. 277 (appellate counsel needs transcript of testimony and jury charge to discharge duties)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of evidence)