1A He appeal of the duial fa 28 e224 Pebtion
t>/ Raeary ee lo "MMer-El v Cockrell 37 VS 322"
the US PRES Guei * 9 "case Govern
He vance of aX Ca Oe Gooulutalna? and 3
wovld te denial of a "Corthrcate of ApPealulo likey" ys th
a citation to "Slack ¥ MeDurncel S24 US 473" and
Citing Fhe equsde feqvlemmt> for a' Crtfeafe
of APPeaperuty" bssu@ in "Slack of " beth"
D The wmarids of an under lurng clam, and
Z) the Prowduenl 155005 thet he seeks fo /ASe,
Violate te errblohed "Shue Decins " created by ite
Supreme Covet iin "UM Mel-EC srendocd te detemine
a Substontie\ showing of the denas of Gaxfipsaal
right, ZP USS 22SRCAX2) that sve1t wodld hal
the claun at least Otbatololc,

2 Dees a request fo/ Standby Gvnsel bu a ProS&
Orkendont in a criminal Jedical Proceeding, Coarstore
A Lovo king of Ae Sotth amendmert ccuhk "te have
the agsstaree of covasel for his detense'? When the
remuest is made ov a citseen of the Unde States, end .
Weold deacal of Standby coursed na Camoul Sudical
Drowcding Fol a YoSr ARkadanr vrol\de Ae oust fi
Dyrendmentt US Consfrtation . and Fourbeanth omens
US Canstrretion QRUZIA Hel Po-Sk debendants dense
Wao Wkartyed (oy Kar costine Wrowdural of ents
. clostacles and loare Cules ok corto Brovece\ an
erscaduce, Fesaltyng tn & denial oA Boe Wocess
Prevenvoy, oO. DreSe Dekendank From CKeACng ov
presen Wey est Passiole dekense.

Ds tte dolloning Statements consmivir a
UAMMbAUEYS CEANest tof cova ,
'T thik £ need a lawyer"
and tw minutes later ensweind 4 QuetT oy fof
Clanity . Stating,
L Probably need te tlk to & lwwyr "aad
weeld QGaatinvatien of Coxtadial sntevoqgution by
State agent after the defendant ansuved a

Question 64 State agert (ok a veqest Ai clesity)
mn the attiinnti'® , vrolate the pfiaciples st forth
rn Dawid Uv United States SIZ VS 452) and would the
dortinvedtion of costedal iterogution atter

Whether the denial of a Certificate of Appealability violates the established 'Slack v. McDaniel' standard to determine a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right