
    STATE of Louisiana v. Isaac PIERRE, Jr.
    No. 58697.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 30, 1976.
    Summers, J., concurred in the denial with statement.
    Tate, J., concurred in the denial in a statement in which Dixon, J., joined.
    Calogero, J., dissented and filed statement in which Dennis, J., joined.
   In re: Isaac Pierre, Jr., applying for remedial writ.

Writ denied. In view of the minute entry, the recorded statement of the trial judge, and disclosure of plea bargain, the showing made is insufficient to warrant the exercise of our supervisory jurisdiction.

SUMMERS, J.,

in addition to the reasons stated for denial of this writ, I am of the opinion the proper rule in these cases is stated in McChesney v. Henderson, 482 F.2d 1101 (5th Cir. 1973).

TATE, J.,

concurring in denial: Under State ex rel Jackson v. Henderson, 260 La. 90, 255 So.2d 85 (1971) a contemporaneous recording should be made (even if not transcribed at the time) of the Boykin examination at the time of the plea, in order to avoid an evidentiary hearing if the volun-tariness of the plea is subsequently contested. However, under the exceptional circumstances here presented, including the finding of the trial judge, I concur in the denial of writs.

DIXON, J., concurs in the denial, subscribing to reasons stated by TATE, J.

CALOGERO, J.,

dissents, is of the opinion that minimally applicant is entitled to have the state at a re-directed evidentiary hearing attempt to produce (“spread up on the record”) proof of an adequate “Boykinization”.

DENNIS, J., is of the opinion the writ should be granted for the limited purpose as described by CALOGERO, J.  