Salas v. Attorney General

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA ENCARNACION SALAS IV, CASE NO. C22-1864 BHS Petitioner, ORDER 9 v. ATTORNEY GENERAL, 11 Respondent.

13 THIS MATTER is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Theresa L. Fricke’s Report and Recommendation (R&R), Dkt. 7, recommending the Court deny pro se petitioner Encarnacion Salas’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition for failure to exhaust his state court remedies, specifically by failing to appeal his conviction to the state’s highest court, the Washington Supreme Court. Dkt. 7 at 2. Salas objects, arguing that he appealed to the Washington Court of Appeals, which “goes through” the Superior Court. Dkt. 8.

19 The R&R correctly concluded that, to properly exhaust his federal claims, a would-be habeas petitioner must finish “one complete round of the State’s established appellate review process,” up to the highest state court with powers of discretionary review. Dkt. 7 at 2 (citing O’Sullivan v. Boerckel, 526 U.S. 838, 845 (1999)). A federal court must dismiss a federal habeas corpus petition if its claims are unexhausted.

2 Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 731 (1991).

3 Salas’s claims are unexhausted, and the R&R is ADOPTED. His amended § 2254 petition, Dkt. 6, is DISMISSED without prejudice. The Court will not issue a certificate of appealability.

6 The Clerk shall enter a JUDGMENT and close the case.

7 IT IS SO ORDERED.

8 Dated this 27th day of June, 2023.

A BENJAMIN H. SETTLE United States District Judge