1) Did the Court of Appeals err in denying a certificate of
appealability on Petitioner 's claim that his trial counsel
was constitutionally ineffective for failing to refute the
aiding and abettting theory of liability that Mr. Harris
conviction is possibly based upon?

2) This claim raises a pressing issue of national
importance: Whether "legally inconsistent" verdicts are in
violation and run contrary to the United States
Constitution. Also whether Mr. Harris trial counsel was
constitutionally ineffective for failing to object to the
legally inconsistent verdicts in violation of Maryland's
State law, when Federal law permits which verdicts. When
the issue is ineffective assistance, a constitutional claim
alleging violation of the Sixth Amendment right to
effective counsel?

3) Did the Court of Appeals err in denying a certificate of
appealability on Petitioner's cumulative effect claim under
Strickland v. Washington?

a. Whether trial was ineffective by failing to object to
lay witness providing expert opinion testimony about the
operation of cell phone techology and cell tower location.

b. Whether trial counsel was ineffective when counsel failed to request instruction to inform the jury witness
invoked their Fifth Amendment Privilege.

c. Whether trial counsel was ineffective when counsel
failed to object to the legally inconsistent verdicts
rendered?

Did the Court of Appeals err in denying a certificate of appealability on Petitioner's claim that his trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective for failing to refute the aiding-and-abetting theory of liability that Mr. Harris' conviction is possibly based upon?