For purposes of appellate review, although the original sealed search warrant affidavit should ordinarily be part of the court record maintained at the court, in the absence of the original document, reversal is indicated only if there is no alternative way to provide an adequate record allowing the appellate court to pass on the issue raised. In this case, which concerned the denial of a motion to quash and traverse and suppress evidence, the section of the original affidavit stating the basis for the belief that a search of appellant’s house, etc., would reveal evidence of a crime was stored at the police department and then purged or destroyed. The appellate court found that by not requiring the entire affidavit be filed with the court clerk, the trial court failed to assure the existence of a record adequate for appellate review, and thereby denied appellant due process of law and ordered reversal of the trial court’s denial of the motion to quash and traverse and suppress. The Supreme Court disagreed, noting that other evidence may be presented to create a competent record allowing for meaningful appellate review.