Moore

*613 MEMORANDUM ***

Appellant Fernardo Moore (Moore) appeals the district court’s dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus seeking relief from his Oregon state conviction and 100-month sentence for sodomy.

Because Moore had no right to counsel at the post-conviction stage, see Smith v. Baldwin, 510 F.3d 1127, 1146-47 (9th Cir.2007) (en banc), any ineffectiveness of his post-conviction counsel could not be imputed to the state for the purpose of demonstrating an external cause for Moore’s procedural default. See Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 754 , 111 S.Ct. 2546 , 115 L.Ed.2d 640 (1991). Therefore, Moore failed to establish that the cause for his procedural default is “something that cannot fairly be attributed to him ...” Id. at 753 , 111 S.Ct. 2546 . Because Moore failed to demonstrate sufficient cause to excuse his procedural default, “we need not address whether he has shown prejudice with respect to [his] claim[s].” Smith, 510 F.3d at 1147 .

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.