Whether the Petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C. § 2255

QUESTIONS PRESENTED a "4. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary. hearing ; pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C. § 2255, when reasonable jurists ; have already determined the District Court's assessment of the : case. to be debatable or wrong, and there remain unresolved , : factual disputes? , 7 . ee oe 22 Whether, given this Court's decision in Riley vCalifornia, oo > 134 °S. Ct. 2493 (2014), a warrantless search of a cell phone © Lo ‘seized incident-to-arrest can be justified when (A) the phone : was securely in possession of the police for 18 days prior to oo i ‘the search, (B) there were no longer any-special needs of law So : enforcement, and (Cc) there were noexigent circumstances? ; _ ; 3. Whether the Petitioner should be afforded an opportunity to .: , question former Defense Counsel in open court regarding — matters pertaining to ineffective assistance; particularly . ; .when the District Court denying the petition was not the Court © . that presided over the pretrial suppression hearings? ; : ; 4 “Whether, given the specific facts and circumstances of the : case, conducting a “voluntariness test" runs afoul of the . . : self-incrimination clause of the Fifth Amendment? — . a, Cet a 2 nities “