Where counsel lies about the existence of psychiatric
mitigating evidence and deries the accused the use of
18 U.S.C. § 3ooloAle) in United States v. Fessel, does this
constitute a substantial showing of the denial of a
constitutional right for CoA purposes?

If a petitioner lacks the factual predicate to file
Under 28 U.S.C. & 2244(d(nA) and the one-year period
expires, is he time-barred from filing under (D)?

How does the L.S. Marshal Hold (Exhibit 14 not constitute an unconstitutional State action under 224(d(1(B)
when (1) the action thereof hindered access to the courts,
and (2) denied "equal protection of the laws?"

When an unconstitutional State action triggers
2244 (dleB): does a petitioner still need to show the
"extraordinary circumstances" of Holland v. Florida or
the external inter ference in Coleman v. Thompson?

Once activated, is there a time limit as to how
long
2a44(d)(1(B) can last?

Is there any ruling or statute that prohibits a
habeas petitioner from starting under 2attld)en(A),
activating (D), triggering (B), and then removing (B) by
reactivating (D)?

Could the Court clarify the "reasonable diligence"
Id
Holland in relation to this case?
in

Where counsel lies about the existence of psychiatric-mitigating-evidence,due-process,ineffective-assistance-of-counsel,habeas-corpus,constitutional-rights,criminal-procedure