1) WHETHER MR. GRIFFIN IS ENTITLED TO A COA BECAUSE JURISTS OF REASON WOULD FIND THE DISTRICT COURT'S RULING ON MR. GRIFFIN'S FEDERAL RULE 60(b)(6) MOTION DEBATABLE OR WRONG TO NOT REOPEN HABEAS CORPUS, AFTER 10 YEARS, UNDER THE ANTITERRORISM AND EFFECTIVE DEATH PENALTY ACT(AEDPA), AND, IF SO, WHETHER THE DISTRICT COURT PROPERLY DENIED PETITIONER'S CONTENTIONS THAT HE'S ENTITLED TO EQUITABLE TOLLING AGAINST AN UNTIMELY PETITION AND PROCEDURAL BAR RULINGS BASED ON UNIQUELY EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES AND EXTREME HARDSHIP IN PURSUING RIGHTS DILIGENTLY, ALBEIT IN THE WRONG FORUM, REDRESS INITIAL JUDICIAL ERRORS ON HABEAS CORPUS AJUDICATION, RESOLVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST OF TRIAL COUNSEL; INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF BOTH TRIAL & APPELLATE COUNSELS, AND THE EXTREME & OUTRAGEUS GOVERNMENT MISCONDUCT OF INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS IN PROMOTIONG INFORMANTS, THROUGHOUT ENTIRE TIME OF PETITIONER'S INCARCERATION, BY DOCCS VEMPLOYEES, ON ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF APPEALIBILITY TO REVIEW MERITS?

Whether Mr. Griffin is entitled to a COA