Unpublished Dispositionscott S. Workman, Petitioner-appellant, v. Arthur Tate, Supt., Respondent-appellee, 856 F.2d 197 (6th Cir. 1988)

Before NATHANIEL R. JONES and RYAN, Circuit Judges, and THOMAS G. HULL, Chief District Judge.^* 

ORDER

Scott S. Workman appeals the district court's judgment denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. This case has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 9(a), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination of the record and the briefs, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a).

Workman claimed that he was denied effective assistance of appellate counsel. The district court determined that Workman had not exhausted his available state court remedies as to this issue and dismissed the petition for lack of exhaustion.

Upon review, we conclude the district court properly dismissed the suit for lack of exhaustion. Accordingly, the judgment is hereby affirmed. Rule 9(b) (5), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.