
    The People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alton Raymond Smith a/k/a Alton Ray Smith a/k/a Alton R. Smith, Defendant-Appellant.
    (No. 71-164;
    Third District
    — November 15, 1971.
    Alton Raymond Smith, pro se.
    
    William J. Scott, Attorney General, of Springfield, and James N. De-Wulf, State’s Attorney, of Rock Island, (Robert Schearer, Fred G. Leach, and Thomas J. Immel, Assistant Attorneys General, of counsel,) for the People.
   PER CURIAM:

The defendant Alton Raymond Smith, following a jury trial in Rock Island County, was convicted of robbery and sentenced to a term of from five to fifteen years in the Illinois State Penitentiary. He appealed to this Court and the conviction was affirmed in People v. Smith, Third District, 1970 (Ill.App.2d), 254 N.E.2d 232.

It appears that prior to the ruling of this Court on his appeal, defendant filed a pro se petition for relief under the Post Conviction Hearing Act. In the post conviction proceeding defendant did not request appointed counsel. In his trial in the circuit court he had first been represented by the public defender, and then by competent privately-retained counsel. On appeal he was represented by competent counsel, also.

In the post conviction petition which was filed by the defendant, it was alleged that the prosecutor made comment in argument to the jury that defendant had not testified in explanation of where the approximately $180 had come from, which was found in his possession. A motion to dismiss the petition was filed by the State on August 3, 1970, on the ground that since an appeal was pending, the alleged improper argmnent by the prosecutor could be raised in that appeal and it was not proper post conviction subject matter. Defendant’s petition was dismissed without an evidentiary hearing on August 13, 1970. The Appellate Court decision in this Court affirming the judgment of the trial court on defendant’s appeal was filed on November 18, 1970.

Following dismissal of the post-conviction petition the Supreme Court of this State allowed petitioner’s request for leave to proceed as a poor person in the appeal from the post conviction ruling and also allowed defendant to proceed pro se. Defendant was likewise granted leave to dispense with the filing of an abstract of record. Thereafter, in October 1971, the cause was transferred to this Court. On appeal now, defendant contends that the State was required to supply him with an adequate record of his jury trial including the argument made by the State’s Attorney in such trial. He contends that the trial court, in the post conviction proceeding, improperly denied his petition.

It appears from the record that no transcription was made of the final arguments in the cause since none had been requested. The allegation that comments referred to had been made in the final argument, (to the effect that defendant had refused to testify) was not supported by affidavits or other evidence as required under the Post Conviction Hearing Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1969, ch. 38, par. 122 — 2; People v. Curtis, 41 Ill.2d 147.)

Defendant had ample opportunity to proceed under the Supreme Court Rule 323(c) and, in absence of a verbatim transcript of the prosecutor’s final argument. Defendant could have undertaken reconstruction of the proceedings from the best available sources. The results could have been presented for certification by the trial court. We also note that no effort was made to raise this issue in the previous appeal proceedings in this Court.

In view of the record as made in the post conviction proceeding, we must conclude that the trial court properly dismissed the petition. The judgment of the circuit court of Rock Island County will, therefore be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.  