1. WHETHER THE RULING OF THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
THIRD CIRCUIT IS CONTRARY TO CLEARLY ESTABLISHED FEDERAL
LAW WHERE THE COURT FAILED TO GRANT A CERTIFICATE OF
APPEALABILITY ON A CLAIM THAT JURIST OF REASON COULD
CLEARLY FIND DEBATABLE?

2. WHETHER THE POST-CONVICTION RELIEF (PCR) COURT 'S
GRANTING OF PETITIONER 'S PCR, AND SUBSEQUENT REVERSAL OF
ITS OWN DECISION, AND THEN THE NEW JERSEY SUPREME COURT' S
REVERSAL OF THE PCR COURT 'S DECISION TO REVERSE ITSELF
CLEARLY ESTABLISHES THAT JURISTS OF REASON COULD FIND
PETITIONER' S CLAIM DEBATABLE?

3. WHETHER THE PETITIONER MADE A SUBSTANTIAL SHOWING
OF THE DENIAL OF HIS SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO EFFECTIVE
ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL, WHICH JURISTS OF REASON COULD
CLEARLY FIND DEBATABLE?

Whether the ruling of the court of appeals for the third circuit is contrary to clearly established federal law