Whether petitioner Truesdale owes the District Court Clerk the docketing and filing fee in order to obtain a Certificate of Appealability ("COA") from the United States Court of Appeals - Eleventh Circuit.

When its assistance United States District Court Middle District of Florida GRANTED Truesdale's (Doc. 13), construed it as a Motion for reconsideration. The portion of its earlier order, (Doc. 6) that imposes a § 505 appellate filing Fee was VACATED. Accordingly to (Doc. 14) Anderson v. Singletary, 111 F.3d 801, 803 -No. (11th Cir. 1997); Pickett v. Wise, 849 F. App'x 804, 904-05 (11th Cir. 2021 )(citing Anderson).

Whether petitioner Truesdale 's (Doc. 1 - April 11,2021 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for the Writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Rule 9 (b) of the Rules Governing 2254 cases in the United States District Courts, appeal governing the pre-AEDPA version of 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (c), dismissed without adjudication on its legal merits, or reaching underlying Federal Constitutional claims, held not to constitute "second or successive " habeas corpus procedure, or Rules governing a denial of a Constitutional rights, or Rules governing, the Sixth and Fourteenths right to effect assistance of counsel for failure to raise a significant and obvious State law claim, and Federal Constitutional claims. See U.S.C. § 2253 (c)(3), petitioner Truesdale has suffered a denial of a constitutional rights. Boyle v. Linchon, 278 F.3d 826, 942-43 (11th Cir. 2001); Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 78 (1986); State v. Neil, 457 so.2d 481 (Fla. 1984) (citing Slock v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (1999)).

Whether petitioner Truesdale's (Doc. 1 - April 11. 2021) "a second or successive " habeas corpus "application Issue I, Issue II, Issue III, and (Amended) question or Great Public Importance on ("Appeal ") from the United States Court of Appeals - Eleventh Circuit for a COA should be review and GRANTED on its legal merits; listed on page 15 and page 16 of this Petitioner. In page 15 through pages 39, violates petitioner Truesdale constitutional rights and rights under the Act(s) of Congress 's.

Whether petitioner Truesdale State Trial Court 's brief colloquy and abbreviated review of evidence relevant to a Batson Challenge satisfies it obligation under step three of the Batson inquiry to consider "all of the circumstance that bear upon the issue of racial animosity " Snyder v. Louisiana, 552 U.S. 472, 478 (2008).

Whether petitioner Truesdale appellate counselor(s) violated his constitutional right on appeal, under the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeal own case. Eagle v. Linahon, 279 F.3d 926 (11th Cir. 2001)

Whether petitioner Truesdale owes the District Court Clerk the docketing and filing fee in order to obtain a Certificate of Appealability