The facts underlying Mr. Cox's ineffective-assistance claim are straightforward. His lawyer failed to object to an evidentiary dearth underlying the presentence report's relevant-conduct analysis. The failure was based on ignorance of the rules, not strategy. The district court imposed a sentence at the low end of the range affected by the PSR's faulty relevant-conduct finding. Despite these facts, the district court found no ineffective assistance of counsel and refused to issue a certificate of appealability. U.S. Circuit Judge James Graves likewise refused to issue a certificate of appealability.

The question presented is this: whether a reasonable jurist might disagree with the district court or Judge Graves about the sufficiency and effect of the lawyer's performance at sentencing.

Whether a reasonable jurist might disagree with the district court or Judge Graves about the sufficiency and effect of the lawyer's performance at sentencing