ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

PER CURIAM

FEBRUARY 8, 2001

RONALD G. THOMAS

APPELLANT

v.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

APPELLEE

CR 98-1084

AN APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF WASHINGTON COUNTY,

NO. CR 96-645

HONORABLE WILLIAM A. STOREY,

CIRCUIT JUDGE

AFFIRMED

On July 26, 1996, judgment was entered reflecting that Ronald G. Thomas had entered a plea of guilty to rape, sexual abuse in the first degree, and sexual solicitation. An aggregate sentence of 264 months' imprisonment was imposed. Thomas subsequently filed in the trial court a timely petition pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule 37, challenging the judgment. An evidentiary hearing was held at which petitioner Thomas was represented by an appointed attorney, Thomas E. Smith. The petition was denied. Appellant filed an appeal from the trial court's order. Because the trial court had failed to make written findings in denying appellant's petition, we remanded this matter for the court to enter specific written findings. The trial court complied with our per curiam dated November 16, 2000, and has entered written findings disposing of appellant's Rule 37 petition.

Now, appellant raises two issues challenging the trial court's decision. Appellant argues that the trial court erred in finding that appellant's plea was voluntary and that appellant wasrendered effective assistance of counsel with regard to appellant's guilty plea.

In claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, the petitioner has the burden of overcoming the presumption of his counsel's competence. Franklin v. State, 293 Ark. 225, 736 S.W.2d 16 (1987). When a guilty plea is challenged, the sole issue is whether the plea was intelligently and voluntarily entered with the advice of competent counsel. Williams v. State, 273 Ark. 371, 620 S.W.2d 277 (1981). The appellant has the heavy burden of establishing that counsel's advice was not competent. United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648, 80 L. Ed. 2d 657, 104 S. Ct. 2039 (1984); Crockett v. State, 282 Ark. 582, 669 S.W.2d 896 (1984). Ineffective assistance of counsel with regard to a guilty plea can be shown only by pointing to specific errors by counsel. Crockett v. State, supra. The appellant must demonstrate that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's errors, he would not have pleaded guilty. Hudson v. State, 294 Ark. 148, 741 S.W.2d 253 (1987). A defendant whose conviction is based on a plea of guilty ordinarily will have difficulty in proving prejudice since his plea rests on the admission in court that he did the act with which he is charged. Crockett v. State, supra. On appeal, we affirm the trial court's denial of postconviction relief unless it is clearly erroneous. Hudson v. State, supra.

First, appellant argues that his counsel forced him to accept a plea bargain and that counsel failed to provide all the evidence to appellant so that he could make an informed decision. We disagree.

At the Rule 37 hearing, appellant testified that counsel informed him that he would not have "much of a chance against a jury trial." According to appellant, counsel instructed appellant how to admit to engaging in deviate sexual activities. Appellant testified that he was coerced into taking a plea bargain because he did not have a full defense to present on his behalf, and he felt like hecould not present a defense for himself. In support of his claim that he could not present a defense, appellant testified that counsel did not provide him with copies of forensic and hospital reports.

Mr. Tim Buckley, appellant's counsel at the trial level, testified that he informed appellant about all the medical and forensic records that were available. He did not give actual copies of the reports to appellant; however, he discussed all the evidence available with appellant. He also said that he told appellant that because of all the incriminating evidence appellant did not stand a very good chance at a jury trial. Counsel explained that he never told appellant that he could not have a jury trial, but that it would be best to avoid a jury trial. According to counsel, appellant agreed with him.

The court found that appellant had failed to offer credible evidence in support of his allegations that he was coerced into entering a guilty plea. The court also noted that appellant's guilty plea was voluntarily and intelligently entered. In view of the testimony by appellant and Mr. Buckley, we find that the trial court's findings are not clearly erroneous. The trial court was not required to believe appellant, especially since he had an interest in the outcome of the proceeding. Hudson v. State, 294 Ark. 148, 741 S.W.2d 253 (1987). At a Rule 37 hearing, the credibility of witnesses is for the trial judge to determine. Stephens v. State, 293 Ark. 231, 737 S.W.2d 147 (1987). For his second point on appeal, appellant argues that he was not advised what his plea agreement included or involved. Appellant argues that he was under the impression that he was only entering a plea of guilty with regard to two charges. Appellant also contends that he was not aware of the amount of time he would have to serve. On cross-examination, appellant admitted that he did indicate on the plea agreement that he understood the nature of all three charges and the amount of time he would have to serve. The trial court found that appellant voluntary and intelligently enteredinto the plea agreement. Again, this was a credibility issue for the trial judge to determine, and we cannot say that the trial court's decision is clearly erroneous.

Affirmed1.

1 We note that the record has been defaced with handwritten comments. All written comments were disregarded by this court.