Edward E. Allen v. State of Oregon

974 F.2d 1341 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Edward E. ALLEN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. STATE OF OREGON, Respondent-Appellee. No. 91-36114. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 24, 1992. * Decided Aug. 31, 1992. Before BRUNETTI, RYMER and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Edward E. Allen, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Allen's counsel filed a brief which identified one possible issue for review: whether the district court erred in dismissing Allen's habeas petition on the ground that he had not exhausted available state court remedies. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we grant counsel's request to withdraw and affirm the district court judgment. 1 3 Allen contends that he should not be required to exhaust state court remedies because (1) he would suffer…