Bobby Darrell Colbert v. Jim McDonald

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
BOBBY DARRELL COLBERT,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
JIM MCDONALD,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 09-35537
D.C. No. 2:08-cv-00870-RSL
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Robert S. Lasnik, Chief District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 29, 2010**
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Washington state prisoner Bobby Darrell Colbert appeals pro se from the
district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
FILED
JUL 01 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-35537 2
Colbert contends that the trial court’s denial of his motion to sever the two
unrelated rape charges for trial denied his due process right to a fair trial. We do
not reach the merits of this claim, however, because Colbert failed to exhaust it in
state court. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1)(A); see also Hiivala v. Wood, 195 F.3d
1098, 1106-07 (9th Cir.1999); Baldwin v. Reese, 541 U.S. 27, 32 (2004).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --