Did the Sixth Circuit err by exceeding the scope of the COA analysis when it re-adjudicated the merits of pro se petitioner's § 2255, and then denied the COA request after determining that reasonable jurists either "would not disagree" with or "would not debate" the District Court's conclusions?

Did the Sixth Circuit create a new rule of law, not supported by statute or this Court's precedent, by requiring evidentiary and/or case law support for a COA request?

Did the court circumvent the law by failing to conduct an evidentiary hearing, preventing the record from being reopened?

Should this Court grant Petitioner a Certificate of Appealability?

Did the Sixth Circuit err by exceeding the scope of the COA analysis