NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

OPINION

VANMETER, Judge.

Craig Cagle appeals from the December 17, 2012, order of the Carlisle Circuit Court denying his motion for a new judgment and sentence. For the following reasons, we affirm.

In 1986, Cagle pled guilty to two counts of murder, two counts of first-degree burglary, three counts of second-degree assault, and kidnapping. He was sentenced to two terms of life imprisonment without parole for 25 years on the murder convictions, to run concurrently. He was sentenced to 20 years each on the two counts of first-degree burglary, to 10 years each on the three counts of second-degree assault, and to 20 years for the kidnapping. These sentences were ordered to run consecutive with the life sentences for a total of two life sentences plus 90 years.

In 1997, Cagle filed a pro se RCr1 11.42 motion to vacate the judgment. No activity of record occurred over the next seven years. In 2004, a letter was filed in the record by a legal assistant at Cagle's correctional facility inquiring into the status of his RCr 11.42 motion. In 2005, the trial court entered an order denying Cagle's RCr 11.42 motion without an evidentiary hearing. Cagle appealed and this court remanded the case to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing concerning the existence and import of a certain psychiatric evaluation as it related to Cagle's claim that his guilty plea was not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently made. Cagle v. Commonwealth, 2005-CA-000835-MR, 2006 WL 1302549 (Ky. App., May 12, 2006). With respect to Cagle's other allegations of error, this court held his claims were "either without merit or should have been raised on direct appeal." Id. at *1.

On remand, the trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing and again denied Cagle's motion. Cagle appealed and this court affirmed. Cagle v. Commonwealth, 2006-CA-001823-MR, 2008-WL-612233 (Ky. App., March 7, 2008). This court limited its review to a consideration of the issue pertaining to the psychiatric evaluation report, citing this court's previous ruling that all of Cagle's other claims of error were "either without merit or should have been raised on direct appeal." Id. at *2.

In 2012, Cagle filed the underlying motion for a new judgment and sentence arguing that his sentence was illegal. He claimed the sentence of 90 years ordered to run consecutive with his life sentences was unlawful since no sentence can be ordered to run consecutive with a life sentence. See KRS2 532.110(1)(c) ("[t]he aggregate of consecutive indeterminate terms shall not exceed in maximum length the longest extended term which would be authorized by KRS 532.080 for the highest class of crime for which any sentence is imposed."); Bedell v. Commonwealth, 870 S.W.2d. 779 (Ky. 2010) (holding that no sentence can be ordered to run consecutive with a life sentence in any case, capital or non-capital).

The trial court denied Cagle's motion for a new judgment and sentence on procedural grounds, finding his claim either was addressed or should have been addressed in the prior RCr 11.42 proceeding. The trial court cited this court's prior decision deeming Cagle's allegations, aside from the evaluation report, "either without merit or should have been raised on direct appeal." The trial court ordered Cagle to cease filing further repetitious and frivolous claims seeking the same relief that has already been addressed and denied multiple times.

Cagle now appeals the trial court's denial of his motion, but has failed to designate for our review the portion of the record containing the prior RCr 11.42 proceedings. As a result, we are unable to confirm whether Cagle raised the issue of the legality of his sentence before. Kentucky law is clear that a silent record supports the decision of the trial court. Hatfield v. Commonwealth, 250 S.W.3d 590, 600-01 (Ky. 2008). The reasoning for this rule is that an appellant has a duty to present a complete record before the court on appeal and matters not disclosed by the record cannot be considered on appeal. Id. (quotations and citations omitted). Therefore, we must assume that the omitted record supports the trial court's decision that Cagle's claim is procedurally barred.

The order of the Carlisle Circuit Court is affirmed.

ALL CONCUR.