(1) Did the United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit
misapplied the ruling in Miller-El v. Cockrell, in denial of petitioner 's
claims? Using conclusory terms and by merely stating, "Petitioner did
not show a substantial showing of a Constitutional Right. "Where the
rule announced by United States Supreme Court in Miller-El v.
Cockrell is, "petitioner satisfied this standard by demonstrating that
jurists of reason could conclude the issues presented are adequate to
deserves encouragement to proceed further. " Slack v. McDaniel.

(2) Did the United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit
Misapplied the standard in relation to petitioner 's Prosecutorial
Misconduct claim? Where the petitioner 's Traverse has been unopposed .
there by conceded to the facts therein. Where the prosecutor knew or
should have known that its witnesses gave false and misleading
testimony from the grand jury, pre-trial and trial. Fernandez v. Capra
916 F. 3d 215, 230-31, (2019). Shih Wei Su v. Filion, 335 F.3d 119, 126
(2003); and failed to correct it when it appeared, Dubose v. Lefevre,
619 F.2d 973, 978, (2d Cir. 1980), and violated the petitioner 's
Constitutional Right under the 14th Amendment. Did the United States
Court of Appeals Second Circuit Misapplied the standard in Miller-El v.
Cockrell in denial of petitioner 's COA in-relation to his Judicial
Misconduct claim? Where the District Court failed to address the
judicial misconduct (Bias) claim, Liteky V. United States, 51Q U.S. 540,
555, 114S.Ct. 1147 (1994), Withrow V. Larkins, 421 U.S. 35, 47, 95
S.Ct. 1456, 1464, (1975), in the Petition/Appellant Traverse and reply
motion the trial the judge was actually bias and prejudiced the
petitioner in his decision this act threw the scales of justice (due
process of law) out of balance and imbued the petitioner with
substantial prejudice. Williams v. Pennsylvania, 136 S.Ct. 1899, 1905
(2016).

(3) The district court adopted the pre-trial judge 's decision
order of the probable cause hearing, where the pre-trial judge misstated
the facts of the record, and rendering the district court fact finding
process unreasonable! a violation of the petitioner 's 14th Amendment.
Wiggins v. Smith, 123 S.Ct. 2538-39 (2003); Harris v. Kuhlman, 345
F.3d 350-351 (2nd Cir: 2003); Taylor v. Maddox, 366 F.3d 992 (9th Cir.
2004), which a jurists of reason could find debatable, announced in
Slack v McDaniel 's jurists of reason standard raised in petitioner 's COA?

(5) Did the United States District Court and the United States
Court of Appeals Second Circuit Misapplied the standard in denial of
petitioner 's ineffective assistance claim Strick

Did the United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit misapply the ruling in Miller-El v. Cockrell?