the trial ...." Rule 3.11(B)(3)(b), Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch.18, App. (2006). This rule does not authorize a supplementation that attempts to establish that defense counsel objected to an action of the trial court, when such an objection is not documented in the official record of the case-particularly when the trial transcript indicates that defense counsel stated that he "agreed with" the trial court's action, and particularly when no one suggests that the transcript is inaccurate. This Court sees no reason to "supplement the record" with the proffered recollection of counsel. Hence Roy's SECOND MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT AND APPLICATION FOR EVIDENTIA-RY HEARING, tendered for filing on January 19, 2006, is hereby DENIED. 21 . 2006 OK CR 6, 130 P.3d 273 (<HOLDING>). 22 . Roy's trial was completed on June 15,
holding that jurors should be instructed regarding the 85 rule contained within 21 02001  121  131 for crimes falling within this rule recognizing this texas rule recognizing rule recognizing this rule recognizing this as the general rule