(1) Under the modest standard for a certificate of appealability, is it at least debatable that the state court unreasonably ignored both Borhan's justifications for seeking retained counsel and the critical fact that counsel was waiting in the courtroom ready to assist as Mr. Borhan's lawyer?

(2) Is Borhan's claim worthy of proceeding to an appeal because the trial court's refusal to allow him retained counsel of his choice deprived him of his right—as set forth in McCoy v. Louisiana—to choose the fundamental direction of his case?

Whether the trial court's refusal to allow the defendant to retain his own counsel of choice deprived him of his Sixth Amendment right to choose the fundamental direction of his defense