1. Does this Court's decision in Gonzalez v. Crosby completely foreclose a habeas petitioner from obtaining Rule 60(b) relief arising from a demonstrable defect in the prior proceedings if, as a result, the District Court will ultimately be required to reexamine some of petitioner's constitutional claims that were previously adjudicated on the merits.

2. Whether the grounds raised by petitioner in his appeal from the denial of his Rule 60(b) motion presented issues upon which reasonable jurists could differ concerning the correctness of the District Court's decision, which required the issuance of a COA.

3. Whether the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals' standard practice of issuing unexplained blanket denials of COAs in both capital and non capital habeas corpus cases improperly obstructs and constrains this Court's discretionary review of its decisions.

Whether a habeas petitioner can obtain Rule 60(b) relief despite a prior adjudication on the merits