IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-30008
Summary Calendar
FREDDIE THIBODEAUX,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
ED C. DAY, JR., Warden,
Washington Correctional Institute;
RICHARD P. IEYOUB, Attorney General,
State of Louisiana,
Respondents-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 97-CV-1992
- - - - - - - - - -
October 23, 1998
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Freddie Thibodeaux, Louisiana prisoner # 315289, filed an
application for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
Thibodeaux argues that there was no evidence to support his guilty
plea to aggravated oral sexual battery on one of his victims.
Thibodeaux argues that the Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 requires that a
state offer sufficient proof to support a guilty plea. State
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 98-30008
- 2 -
courts must ensure that guilty-plea proceedings satisfy due process
requirements, but “state courts are not bound to follow the federal
plea-taking procedures” established in Rule 11. Frank v.
Blackburn, 646 F.2d 873, 882 (5th Cir. 1980) (en banc), modified on
other grounds, 646 F.2d 902 (1981).
At his guilty plea, Thibodeaux testified that the prosecutor
was correct when he stated that Thibodeaux "would lick their [the
young victims] bodies with his tongue." A defendant’s solemn
declarations in open court carry a strong presumption of truth.
Blackledge v. Allison, 431 U.S. 63, 74 (1977). Given this
testimony, the state court finding - that Thibodeaux was fully
aware of the charges to which he was pleading guilty - cannot be
said to be so clearly erroneous as to demand reversal. See
Drinkard v. Johnson, 97 F.3d 751, 767-69 (5th Cir. 1996), cert.
denied, 117 S. Ct. 1114 (1997).
Thibodeaux also asserts that his counsel was ineffective for
allowing him to plead guilty. If a defendant enters a guilty plea
on advice of counsel, he must show that there is a reasonable
probability that, but for counsel’s errors, he would not have
pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial. Hill v.
Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985). Thibodeaux has not shown that
there is a reasonably probability that he would have insisted on
going to trial but for counsel’s actions.
The interests of justice do not require that counsel be
appointed to assist Thibodeaux to pursue this appeal. See Self v.
Blackburn, 751 F.2d 789, 793 & n.19 (5th Cir. 1985). Thibodeaux’s
motion is denied.
No. 98-30008
- 3 -
AFFIRMED; MOTION DENIED.