argument with the court’s ruling. In State v. Harris, 01-2730 (La.1/19/05), 892 So.2d 1238, 1261, cert. denied, — U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 102, 163 L.Ed.2d 116 (2005), the Louisiana Supreme Court discussed the issue regarding incomplete records on appeal (footnote added): Although this Court has found reversible error when material portions of the trial record were unavailable or incomplete, “[a] slight inaccuracy in a record or an inconsequential omission from it which is immaterial to a proper determination of the appeal w[ill] not cause ...” reversal of a defendant’s conviction. Castleberry, 98-1388 at p. 29, 758 So.2d at 773. Moreover, a defendant is not entitled to relief because of an incomplete record absent a showing of prejudice based on the missing portions of the transcripts. Id. (<HOLDING>). In the instant case, an examination of the
holding that the defendant did not show prejudice to support ineffective assistance of counsel because any evidentiary error was harmless holding that the defendant failed to show any prejudice resulting from bench conferences not being transcribed and therefore there was no reversible error holding that error in denying such challenge is reversible error without demonstration of prejudice holding that the trial courts failure to have each bench conference and ruling properly transcribed was not reversible error when the defendant failed to show that he was prevented from presenting any relevant evidence and failed to establish that any prejudice resulted from the absence in the record holding the denial of a bill of particulars was not reversible error because it failed to cause the defendant any prejudice