(1. Should an appellant have a voice in his or her own appeal? If not, can s/he be procedurally barred for failing to raise it as here?

(2. Where, as here, the COA is aware that a large part of the lower court record is missing from the appeal; can "counsel hardly be said to have made a strategic choice when s/he ha[d] not yet obtained the texts which such a decision could be made." (United States v. Gray, 878 F.3d. 702, 712 (3rd Cir. 1989))?

(3. Should an appellate attorney include the entire lower court record in the appeal so s/he can make an informed tactical decision? And if s/he refuses to do so, should appellant be permitted to do so?

(4. "Ineffective Assistance of Appellate Counsel" ("IAAC") is conclusively established where s/he failed to raise: (a. "potentially meritorious claims: or (b. one's "stronger than those presented on appeal. (Nauven v. Curry, 736 F.3d. 1287, 1291 (9th Cir. 2013) and Hurles v. Ryan, 752 F.3d. 768, 783 (9th Cir. 2014)). Does the Fourteenth Amendment require the State to consider these facts when presented by an appellant during an appeal?

(5. If an attorney refuses to raise substantial constitutional claims on appeal, does a COA err by: (1. refusing to take judicial notice of its own records of the claims brought in pretrial mandamus petitions; or (2. consider the claims brought during the appeal by the appellant?

(6. If an attorney refuses to bring highly substantial claims here, does the substantial right of appeal require the reviewing COA to hear the voice of the appellant, so the substantial right of appeal is not reduced to a farce or a sham as on appeal?

Should an appellant have a voice in their own appeal when the Court of Appeal appoints counsel who fails to raise substantial constitutional claims?