1. Whether the Ninth Circuit arbitrarily concluded that Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a Constitutional right?

2. Whether reasonable jurist could debate the district court's conclusion that Petitioner committed a public offense as opposed to presumptive lawful activity under N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v Bruen?

3. Whether reasonable jurist could debate the district court's procedural holding that Petitioner had the opportunity to litigate his claim under Stone v Powell and Townsend v Sain?

4. Whether the Deputy District Attorney ("DDA") failure to produce evidence relating to the purported resisting, underlying suspicion and officer Rardin's credibility at preliminary hearing/ motion to suppress evidence constituted a violation of Petitioner's rights as described in Brady v Maryland and/or Napue v Illinois?

5. Whether there was reasonable or probable cause and/or all the elements satisfied at trial based on sufficient evidence under Bunkley v Florida and/or Fiore v White?

Whether the Ninth Circuit arbitrarily concluded that Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a Constitutional right, and whether reasonable jurists could debate the district court's procedural and substantive conclusions regarding the Petitioner's legal claims