
    Jerome HENDERSON v. STATE.
    CR 89-626.
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
    Jan. 18, 1991.
    Jerome Henderson, pro se.
    Don Siegelman, Atty. Gen., and Andrew J. Segal, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   ON RETURN TO REMAND

BOWEN, Judge.

On remand, the circuit court entered the following order:

“Court makes the following findings of facts: On 9-5-89 Judge Pearson denied Petitioner’s Petition for Relief under Rule 20, said Petition having been filed on Aug 17, 89.
“On Feb. 16, 1990 a successive Petition was filed & adversely ruled upon by J. Pearson on 3-7-90.
“The Feb 90 Petition is deemed a ‘successive’ petition alleging identical complaint & barred under Rule 20.2(b).
“Further, see Court’s Exhibit ‘B’ re Def’s statement of satisfaction of services rendered by court appointed atty which refutes def’s claims re ineffective assistance of counsel; further, Def. states in open court that what he wants is a ‘sentence reduction,’ see letters from Def. about his changed life, etc.”

Based on this order, the judgment of the circuit court denying the petition for post-conviction relief is affirmed.

OPINION EXTENDED; AFFIRMED.

All Judges concur.  