Farrar

MEMORANDUM **

Stephen Lewis Farrar appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . We conclude that all but *813 one of his claims are barred. The only reviewable federal claim — whether the prosecutor’s comment on petitioner’s post-arrest silence violated due process — was rejected by the district court. We agree and affirm.

DISCUSSION

Farrar raises numerous arguments in his habeas petition in support of his claims that he was (1) denied a fair trial due to prosecutorial misconduct; (2) denied the right to represent himself; and (3) received ineffective assistance of counsel. All but one of these claims are barred because Farrar failed to exhaust state remedies by “fairly presenting his federal claim[s] in the state courts and thereby giving those courts an opportunity to act on his elaim[s].” Peterson v. Lampert, 319 F.3d 1153, 1155-56 (9th Cir.2003) (en banc). Although Farrar did file a post-conviction petition alleging his current claims, the petition was dismissed because it failed to state “particular, ultimate facts sufficient to constitute a claim for relief.” Procedural default bars federal…