Devore

MEMORANDUM ***

We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. 1 Devore’s petition raises various claims of prosecutorial misconduct (ground two), judicial misconduct (ground three), and ineffective assistance of appellate counsel (ground four). We conclude that all but one of Devore’s claims are procedurally defaulted, and we reject his remaining claim on the merits.

Federal habeas relief is unavailable to a petitioner who fails to exhaust state remedies by not fairly presenting the substance of his or her federal claim to the state courts. 2 The state’s exhaustion process “may require that one procedure be used to the exclusion of another so long as the right of review is not foreclosed or unduly limited.” 3 In Oregon, claims of prosecutorial or judicial misconduct must normally be raised in a direct appeal, not in a post-conviction relief (PCR) proceeding. 4 Thus, an Oregon petitioner who fails to raise claims of prosecutorial or judicial misconduct on direct appeal fails to exhaust state remedies for those claims, and procedurally defaults any corresponding federal habeas claims.

I. Ground Two: Prosecutorial Misconduct Claims

Devore did not raise any claims of…