Affirmed.1 See Local Rule 21.2
. The appellant in this habeas corpus appeal by a state prisoner has contended that: (1) he was placed in double jeopardy; (2) the trial judge made prejudicial statements in charging the jury; (3) his coerced confession was used against him at the trial; (4) the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict of guilty of manslaughter ; (5) his privately-retained counsel was ineffective; and (6) the information upon which lie was convicted was invalid because allegedly not executed under oath.
. See N.L.R.B. v. Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, 5 Cir., 1970, 430 F.2d 966.