QUESTION No. 1: DOES THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT HAVE JURISDICTION
TO REVIEW THE DENIAL OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY BY A COURT
OF APPEALS ABSENT A FINAL JUDGMENT OR DECREE?

QUESTION No. 2: WHETHER THE COURT OF APPEALS SHOULD HAVE ISSUED
A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY FROM THE DISTRICT COURTIS DETERMINATION
THAT THE PETITIONER'S FEDERAL HABEAS PETITION WAS TIME-BARRED
WHEN REASONABLE JURISTS COULD DEBATE THAT THE !-YEAR LIMITATION
PERIOD COMMENCED UNDER TITLE 28 U.S.C SECTION 2244(d)(1)(D)
ON THE DATE THAT THE AFFIDAVIT WAS EXECUTED OR THE DATE THAT
PETITIONER BECAME AWARE OF THE AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF HIS
CONSTTTUJTfBONAL CLAIM?

QUESTION No. 3: WHETHER THE COURT OF APPEALS SHOULD HAVE ISSUED
A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY FROM THE DISTRICT COURT'S DETERMINATION
THAT THE PETITIONER'S FEDERAL HABEAS CORPUS PETITION WAS TIME-BARRED
WHEN REASONABLE JURISTS COULD DEBATE WHETHER THE PROCEDURAL RULING
WAS CORRECT UPON THE DISTRICT COURT'S CONSIDERATION OF THE MERITS
OF THE PETITIONER^ CONSTITUTIONAL CLAIM IN THE DETERMINATION
THAT THE PETITION WAS TIME-BARRED?

QUESTION No. 3: WHETHER THE COURT OF APPEALS SHOULD HAVE ISSUED
A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY FROM THE DISTRICT COURT'S
DETERMINATION THAT THE PETITIONER'S FEDERAL HABEAS CORPUS PETITION
WAS TIME-BARREDDWHEN REASONABLE JURISTS COULD DEBATE WHETHER
THE PROCEDURAL RULING WAS CORRECT UPON THE DISTRICT COURTS
FAILURE TO CONSIDER AND.TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE PETITIONERS
CONFINEMENT IN ITS DUE DILIGENCE INQUIRY?

Whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to review the denial of a certificate of appealability and whether the Court of Appeals should have issued a certificate of appealability for a time-barred federal habeas petition