United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 96-2072 ___________ Thomas L. Miller, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Larry Norris, Director, * Eastern District of Arkansas.

Arkansas Department of * Correction, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * ___________ Submitted: March 5, 1997 Filed: April 8, 1997 ___________ Before HANSEN, MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM.

Thomas L. Miller, an Arkansas inmate, brought a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition asserting that the evidence was insufficient to support his three state drug convictions, and that his trial counsel was ineffective. The district court1 dismissed the petition as procedurally barred, rejecting Miller's assertion of ineffective assistance as cause. Miller appeals.

Having reviewed

The Honorable Henry L. Jones, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). the record, we conclude that Miller cannot show he was prejudiced by his counsel's performance, and thus we need not determine whether that performance was deficient. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 697 (1984); see also Lockhart v. Fretwell, 506 U.S. 364, 369 (1993) (explaining Strickland prejudice standard). As Miller has not established cause to excuse his state procedural default, see Murray v. Carrier, 477 U.S. 478, 488 (1986), we agree that his federal habeas claims are procedurally barred.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-2-