Where petitioner admitted his ineffective assistance of counsel claim was procedurally defaulted because he did not exhaust available state remedies, the Court of Appeals rejected his claim that his procedural default should be excused because Oregon’s procedure for implementing the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 was deficient. Even if the procedure was deficient, petitioner failed to show how appellate counsel’s failure to file an Anders compliant brief lead to the failure to file for further review in the Oregon Supreme Court. Sufficiency of the evidence issues turning on Oregon state law were not summarized.