Salter v. State

For reasons hereinafter addressed, I would affirm appellant’s conviction of the offense of possession with intent to distribute cocaine.

1. The record does not contain a transcript of the suppression hearing, and appellant is not filing as an indigent, pro se appellant. The trial court’s motion on its face reflects that in finding the existence of exigent circumstances justifying a warrantless search, the *245court considered the evidence adduced at the evidentiary hearing of July 13, 1989. It is well established that, in the absence of a transcript of the suppression hearing, we must assume as a…