¶1 This is an appeal from Francis Sima’s conviction for violation of I.C. § 18-6710, making repeated anonymous telephone calls with the intent to annoy. We affirm. Appellant was charged with the offense and tried before a magistrate sitting without a jury. He was found guilty, convicted and sentenced to a suspended ten day sentence and the payment of a $50.00 fine. On appeal to the district court that conviction was affirmed.
¶2*644 Other than the alleged facts set forth in appellant’s brief, we are without a record since appellant has failed to provide a reporter’s transcript. Upon appeal, appellant carries the burden of presenting such a record as to enable our review of the asserted errors. In the absence thereof we will not presume error. State v. Peterson, 87 Idaho 147, 391 P.2d 846 (1964). A litigant appearing pro se is held to the same standards and rules as one appearing with counsel. Scafco v. Rigby & Mason, 98 Idaho 432, 566 P.2d 381 (No. 12251, June 27, 1977).
¶3 The conviction is affirmed.