Did the the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit impose an improper and unduly burdensome Certificate of A Appealability standard that contravenes Supreme Court precedent and the AEDPA itself when it denied this state prisoner a Certificate of Appealability on his motion to reopen the judgement denying fed eral relief and obtain merits review of his claims that his trial counsel was ineffective, the Court's bias and the State's failure to correct knowingly perjured testimony by the ineffective attor ney at theiplea hearing in this case when counsel-after schooling- his client to just answer yes- s tatedI ] sn' t it true that the District Attorney's office has provided us with theigrand jury tran scripts','"when it was proven at the.-state evidentiary hearing on hab eas that no such transcripts ever existed to be illegally provided in discovery in direct violation of federal and state law that pro hibits provision of the grand jury transcripts in discovery where innocence was the central l issue at the plea?

2). Does the law of the case doctrine legally and constitutions? ally trump the AEDPA when a clear cut error was proven on 60(b) to have taken place at the federal district court level where it was proven-and admitted by theeRespondent-that the prisoner's Actual Inn ocence MteGiiiggin.' vBef.Rin exception to the AEDPA^ s one year statute of limitations was '.'overlooked" by the district court,.who dbnied relief, and then the Court ^of--Appeals 'then : deh 'iedla'COA based clearly Ion. the WEang prong^ofcSlack^vsMcfianiel 's encouragement to proceed further framework when the only issue before them jurisdictionally was whe ther a reasonable jurist could debate the correctness of the dist rict court's procedural ruling thattwasn't made and then that Court of Appeals decision was the-basis for the law of the case denial of a COA in the second instance pertaining to the 60(b)?

Does the Federal Court of Appeals have the authority-or jur isdiction-under the AEDPA,to decide an issue that a federal district court has overlooked or ignored by failing to address an actual inn ocence exception to the AEDPA one year statute of limitations and then rely on their own unauthorized decision as the law of the case doctrine in order to then deny COA on Certificate of Appealability?

Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit impose an improper and unduly burdensome Certificate of Appealability standard?