1. Whether Petitioner seeking a COA demonstrated a substantial
showing of the denial of a Constitutional right and that jurist of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling under test
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,483 (2000).

2. Whether the district court properly dismissed all seven
habeas claims on the basis they were barred by the
AEDPA statute of limitations.

3. Whether district court and Court of Appeals 9th Cir.
correctly detirmined that appellant failed demonstrating
a prima facie case.

4. Whether the Courts correctly detirmined that appellant had failed to make a sufficient showing of ineffective assistance
of counsel as grounds for untimely appeal of conviction to
merit further proceedings on that issue in the court.

5. Whether district court correctly detirmined that appellant
had failed to make a sufficient showing of Brady material
showing "actual innopence" to merit further proceedings
on that issue in the district court and U.S. Court of Appeals
9th Cir.

6. Whether the Court correctly detirmined that petitioner
was in custody under conviction or sentence under attack
at the time petition for writ of habeas corpus was filed.

7. Whether the District Court and U.S. Court of Appeals for the
9th Circuit standard of review was deficient with relevant
decisions of this court and erred denying petitioner's properly stated rule of law.

Whether Petitioner seeking a COA demonstrated a substantial showing of the denial of a Constitutional right