IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-40341
Summary Calendar
__________________
FRANKIE DON HUIE,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
GARY L. JOHNSON, Director,
Texas Department of Criminal Justice,
Institutional Division,
Respondent-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:94-CV-49
- - - - - - - - - -
October 22, 1996
Before JONES, DeMOSS and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Texas prisoner Frankie Don Huie, # 335113, appeals the
district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. Huie
argues that his trial attorney was ineffective for failing to
object to testimony concerning an extraneous offense or request a
limiting instruction, attack the credibility of a prosecution
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 95-40341
-2-
witness, and conduct an adequate pre-trial investigation and that
counsel's cumulative trial errors caused Huie's trial to be
fundamentally unfair. Having reviewed the record, we conclude
that Huie has failed to show ineffective assistance of counsel.
Lockhart v. Fretwell, 506 U.S. 364, 372 (1993).
For the first time on appeal, Huie argues that counsel
failed to interview his neighbors, call several witnesses, hire a
firearms expert, argue to the jury that Huie's son mistakenly
left the murder weapon loaded, or file an appeal after
contracting to do so. Huie further implies that the State
withheld exculpatory evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland,
373 U.S. 83, 87 (1963). He has not shown that these issues meet
the standard for plain error. See Highlands Ins. v. National
Union Fire Ins., 27 F.3d 1027, 1031-32 (5th Cir. 1994), cert.
denied, 115 S. Ct. 903 (1995).
Huie’s motion for appointed counsel is DENIED, and the
dismissal of his § 2254 petition is AFFIRMED.