I.
WHETVER REASONABLE JURISTS
WOULD FIND TME DISTRICT
COURT'S RESOLUTION OF PETITIONER'S
DUE PROCESS
CHAIN DEBATABLE OR WRONG WITH RESPECT TO
EXTENDINC A HBERTY INTEREST IN DISCRETIONARY
HEARINGS FOLLOWING EXPIRATON
PARUME -RELEASE
OF WOWER -END SENTENCE FOR PURPOSOS CFACCORDMNG
ADEQUATE BEVIEN PROCEDURES, AND:
I.
WHETMER REASONABVE JURISTS WOUID FIND TVE DISTRICT
COURT'S RESOLUTION OF PETITONER'S CONTENTION TUAT
H DNATA MD M
233 (3A C:. 1T8O. SUOULD BE FOZLOWED WERE, TUUS
RECONCILLINE SPLITS BETWEEN CRRCUITS, PEBATABVE R
WRONG?

Whether reasonable tourists would find the district court's resolution of petitioner's due process claim debatable or wrong with respect to extending a liberty interest in discretionary parole release hearings following expiration of lower-end sentence for purposes of according adequate review procedures