Case Name: Bobby Darrell COLBERT, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Jim McDONALD, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-07-01
Citations: 385 F. App'x 754
Docket Number: No. 09-35537
Parties: Bobby Darrell COLBERT, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Jim McDONALD, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 385
Pages: 754–755

Head Matter:
Bobby Darrell COLBERT, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Jim McDONALD, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 09-35537.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 29, 2010.
Filed July 1, 2010.
Bobby Darrell Colbert, Walla Walla, WA, pro se.
Alex Kostin, Assistant Attorney General, Attorney General’s Office, Olympia, WA, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Washington state prisoner Bobby Darrell Colbert appeals pro se from the dis- triet court's judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
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, 124 S.Ct. 1347, 158 L.Ed.2d 64 (2004).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.