Edward E. Allen v. State of Oregon

978 F.2d 714 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. 92-35342. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 22, 1992. * Decided Oct. 26, 1992. Before BEEZER, CYNTHIA HOLCOMB HALL and WIGGINS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Edward E. Allen, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition 1 for failure to exhaust state remedies. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Weygandt v. Ducharme, 774 F.2d 1491, 1492 (9th Cir.1985), and we affirm. 3 Allen was convicted of four counts of issuing a false financial statement in violation of Or.Rev.Stat. § 165.100. In his habeas petition, Allen sought to challenge the conviction based on allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel in the state trial court. 4 Allen concedes that he has not exhausted his state…