Unpublished Disposition, 852 F.2d 573 (9th Cir. 1988)

MEMORANDUM

Whatley appeals the dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. We affirm the dismissal.

Whatley's habeas petition challenged his state conviction on several grounds not raised before the California courts. Our review of the record indicates that appellant did not raise the following issues before the California courts in any of his petitions for habeas corpus: (1) misconduct of Superior Court Judge Park; (2) erroneous jury instructions; (3) ineffective assistance of trial counsel Weis; (4) no police complaint on file; (5) no medical report on file; (6) use of false police report; (7) use of false probation report; (8) denial of right to cross-examine witness at preliminary hearing; (9) use of perjured testimony; (10) refusal of attorney Cedillo to move for new trial at sentencing; (11) misconduct by Superior Court Judge Miller; (12) misconduct by Deputy District Attorney Kubouchi; and (13) error by Municipal Court Judge Ransom in not issuing a bench warrant for the victim. Where, as here, a habeas petition contains both unexhausted and exhausted claims, a federal court must dismiss the state prisoner's habeas petition. Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509, 522 (1982). Consequently, we affirm the district court's dismissal of Whatley's section 2254 petition.

AFFIRMED.