Whether the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals erred in a decision that conflicts with decisions of other Courts of Appeals on the same important matter, by deciding an important federal question, that of counsel's performance and the deprivation of his civil rights under color of authority, in a way that is so far departed from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings and the sanctioning of such a departure by the lower court as to call for the exercise of this Court's supervisory power

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED This Case Presents ON Importevt issue Comcermins the Proper t oMlitatlon Of B Certificate of A Meal ability Cc-0.4.) Sivce Whig Cart Setivy the Stondard id Sl8CK V. MC Daniel avd Miller-EL \. Cockeral] a for Ane \SSu duce OF 8 C04. 2453 0@ IN light of the Autiterroris Ond ESKecive Dealth pewalty act of 9b Cena). Gasy) the Courts do thedeveuth Circuit have fall ing oft of SYNC . With Other Citevits ow severally the Same elements, OS it relates oe do CoumsSel for the accused aud his due Process riynes, and this Court het overruled aud remavded for the iSsuauce OF C.0.4.5 thet the elevesth Circbit h25 typically devied wwder the Stavderd that this curt hes Set forth duo follasing AEDPA to Ad Judicate habeas Corpus telief Cleims, 85 9 Lesult of the deferest+ Coyetsios, the Courts tho this cipeutt have veached on yeteria/ elemars thet dre iw diSting vishable, have allowed @ deParture twat Grins es UPow the Coustikvriqual tights of a7 Bccused to 2 Lull avd Lair adjudicatin OF \ Keir comStitubion al Claims, Bed the Cour) of AfPeals for the eleventh Circuit Was SawCtinved SUCh & deParture Aud & direct Cow flied of Iwkerest Wilh this Cour} 8NI Other Cdarcuits Was emerjsed bout the Profer ier Presetion for the isSuace of @ COA, Te the ISance of 9 40.4. BwafPlicaby is mot Cequired to Prove his Cese 25 2 +o the court Of APPeals Awd the eleverth : Circuit hes beew Ot odds With its Sister Circult, the G\ Fibty Circuit bo TLS apPlicetionn of federal low as it Preteivs tod C.0A. iSSuauce aud the feleyveucy to issues of Tibi 13,14 AmeddMev} Vivletiods +o he couStitvsiod of the ONited SHOtes, This Petidion Rddreses that question, Speci tically, the guest 109 PreSested iss LA Did the eleventh Arevit Cot of OpPeals ether 3 Aecisina It CouSlik With decisinns Of Other Court of dffeals (us.cA) ov the ; . Same tnPorkeut Metter, loy deciding av imbortent Seder al question, that = * Of£ Counsels Performance aud the AwPrivatlon of his Civil rights uuder ; Color of Author, 10 2 wey tet iS So far departed fron the dicted Bud Vwell Course of Judici2l Proceedivg awd the Sanctiosins of Such @ deporture by the lover Cor} 2) fo Call Sor the excercise oF {his Court SoPervisery Power Did the lover Court Pwsed iS discretion 4o Not {Sue B 6.0.0. for Ur. muUhawnad “welhecive BHiStasce of Coumsel Claimg? 18) Whebher tis Court Shotd sreuy tne Writ of Cettiorart _ Qvd Vacatt the Blevew\h circuit Cours of 2phealCus.ca) Of iio , Pa Bnd Cemard to that Court for CovSideretinn that MP. Mehamned WES Prevented by the Stabe Court aud district Court, kron 2° Full ded : Fair hearing IW Presenting Meritorious Cleims O€ &, 6, 13,14 Arresd men} Violotions to the U.S. Constitution dud be heard on & Metter that 1s deter misotive of the ISSve that Cequire this Court to ekercise its Supervisory power to @S5ure MA Muhammad is afforded @ full aud Loic offortusity to howestly litigate his Coguitive CosStitution 2) Cloias? \S) Did the elevesth Circuit BC+ Contrary to this Court avtority i HerriS V welsow Im holding thet hy i+ opivion MM. Mohammad 2s Wot Shown diligence, or the fects IWvated Wold Le Sufficiewt to | establish by Cheer 2ud Convinciny evidence Anat byt for Xhe Cou Stitutional error wo Ce zsov2ble oct Lider Luold Wave found wet mr, Muhammed Wes guilty of Xhe Upderlyiny OMesse , Bud Usteesouebly ected Contrary to feder2| law dv its determdation of Cects? , Additionally (wis case Present dhe ISSve of; . 2) Was Ai21 Covssel Merfoc mance Ineffective withid the Meaning of Strickland V. WeShingto” tHays depriving MM Muhemned of his cight to Counsel vsder the Sith @Hewdmeyt fo U.S. Coustitut int 38) Did the State of Georsi2? Suborw Purjyry Do Providins festimouy Syainst mr. Muhemmad Pur Suawt to the F(3il4 Auerdaewt to the U-5+ Cons Stitution? a°) Dig employees of the Stote of Georsi2 Violeted Mr Myhenmad Civil Rights With the Meawiny of Ly US.Co § a4l, 3422 ° 4) Did. eurployees of the State of Georgia Violebe MM ; Muhemmed Civil Cights Withiv the Meawieg of 4a