1. Whether the Eleventh Circuit's truncated no-prejudice analysis on Petitioner's claim that counsel was ineffective during jury selection violated the standard set forth in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), which requires courts to consider all of "counsel's errors" and consider the "totality of the evidence" in assessing prejudice.

2. Whether the Eleventh Circuit violated the certificate of appealability (COA) standard when it denied Petitioner a COA on his state-court-record-based arguments under Martinez v. Ryan, 566 U.S. 1 (2012), because it is at least reasonably debatable whether such arguments survive Shinn v. Ramirez, 596 U.S. 366 (2022).

3. Whether the Eleventh Circuit overstepped the "reasonable jurists could debate" standard for obtaining a COA when it denied Petitioner a COA on his claim under Caldwell v. Mississippi, 472 U.S. 320 (1985), which Justices of this Court actually debated at an earlier stage of his case.

Whether the Eleventh Circuit's analysis of ineffective assistance of counsel during jury selection violated Strickland v. Washington standards and whether the circuit court improperly denied a certificate of appealability under Martinez v. Ryan and Shinn v. Ramirez