Whether Petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on her ineffective assistance of counsel claim

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Where a state trial judge summarily rejected, without a hearing, Petitioner’s claim that counsel was ineffective because he induced Petitioner to waive her Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial based upon his personal relationship with that same judge, is Petitioner, on habeas review, entitled to an evidentiary hearing? 2. Would reasonable jurists find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable, warranting a certificate of appealability, where, in assessing “actual innocence”, the court erroneously required Petitioner to prove that the offense never occurred, rather than considering whether it was “more likely than not that no reasonable juror would have found petitioner guilty beyond a reasonable doubt” -especially where newly discovered evidence and other facts reveal that the complainant and a key witness were threatened and coerced into testifying falsely?