In State ex rel. Kisner v. Fox, 165 W.Va. 123, 267 S.E.2d 451 (1980), a transcript of a criminal circuit court trial could not be supplied to the defendant because the court reporter's notes had been lost. The Court observed in Kisner that an accurate record is necessary for appeal purposes because the record may contain "prejudicial remarks, hidden issues, and questions relating to the judge's instructions to the jury which may disclose error substantial enough to reverse the conviction." (Id. at 126-27, 267 S.E.2d at 453.) Pursuant to this reasoning, the Court held in syllabus point two of Kisner that the failure of the State to provide a transcript of a criminal proceeding for the purpose of appeal, absent extraordinary dereliction on the part of the State, will not result in the release of the defendant; however, the defendant will have the option of appealing on the basis of a reconstructed record or of receiving a new trial. (Id. at 123-24, 267 S.E.2d 452.) In Kisner, the defendant was convicted of sexual assault in the first degree. The defendant was unable to appeal his conviction because of an error that prevented reproduction of the trial transcript. Consequently, the circuit court decided to grant the defendant a new trial. The defendant sought a writ of prohibition to stop the retrial and have the charge against him dismissed. The Court denied the writ of prohibition and approved of the circuit court's decision to grant a new trial. In so doing, the Court held, in Syllabus point 2, that the failure of the State to provide a transcript of a criminal proceeding for the purpose of appeal, absent extraordinary dereliction on the part of the State, will not result in the release of the defendant; however, the defendant will have the option of appealing on the basis of a reconstructed record or of receiving a new trial. (165 W. Va. 123, 267 S.E.2d 451.)