Does a copy of the superseding indictment in the record need to be replaced with the original superseding charge?

Although it is unfortunate that the original superseding indictment is missing from the record, we find no basis for vacating Young's conviction. In the absence of other evidence, the court record must be presumed to be correct. See United States v. Carroll, 932 F.2d 823, 825 (9th Cir.1991). Young has offered no proof that the copy of the superceding indictment in the record is incorrect or different from the original superseding indictment in any way other than the lack of the grand jury foreperson's signature. Accordingly, he has not overcome the presumption that the copy of the superseding indictment contained in the record is correct.