Nguyen v. Uttecht

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 8 NGHIA V. NGUYEN, 9 Petitioner, CASE NO. C19-cv-1054 RAJ 10 v. ORDER DISMISSING FEDERAL HABEAS ACTION 11 WASHINGTON STATE, 12 Respondent.

The Court has reviewed Petitioner’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition, the Report and Recommendation of the Honorable Brian A. Tsuchida, United States Magistrate Judge, Petitioner’s objection to the Report and Recommendation, and the remaining record. The Court concurs fully in the recommendations of the Report and Recommendation.

Petitioner’s objection is largely a recitation of the same arguments that were considered and rejected by Judge Tsuchida in his well-reasoned R&R. Petitioner admits that he has not exhausted his state remedies but argues that his petition is an “exception” because his constitutional rights are being violated. Dkt. # 8 at 3-5. This argument is without merit. As noted in Judge Tsuchida’s R&R, “a state prisoner's federal habeas petition should be dismissed if the prisoner has not exhausted available state remedies as to any of his federal claims.” Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 731 (1991). “This exhaustion requirement is also grounded in principles of comity; in a federal system, the States should have the first opportunity to address and correct alleged violations of state prisoner's federal rights.” Id. Because Petitioner has failed to exhaust his state court remedies, the Court lacks jurisdiction to review his federal habeas claims and the petition must be dismissed.

2 Accordingly, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. # 7), DENIES Petitioner’s objection (Dkt. # 8), DISMISSES this habeas petition without prejudice, and DECLINES to issue a certificate of appealability. The clerk shall enter judgment for Respondent and ensure that Judge Tsuchida receives notice of this order.

DATED this 6th day of November, 2019.

A 9 The Honorable Richard A. Jones United States District Judge