Whether a criminal defendant's right to testify was violated when his trial counsel prevented him from testifying to his version of events during the sentencing phase

QUESTION PRESENTED During Petitioner's sentencing hearing, Petitioner took the stand, maintaining his innocence, and expressed his desire to tell the jury his side of the story in this closed case where the complainant and the Petitioner shot each other with the same gun. The jury witnessed Petitioner's trial counsel thwart his efforts and heard counsel argue during closing arguments that the fact that Solis (the complainant) was shot, "can't possibly ever be justified," implying that Petitioner was guilty. Petitioner was sentenced: to 40 years in a Texas prison. . Petitioner's case raises an issue of national importance because it involves the deprivation of an individual's fundamental and constitutional rights: whether and to what extent will the criminal justice system tolerate a defense attorney who overrides a defendant's right to testify, even if by only preventing him from testifying to a part of his defense. Specifically, did the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit err when it denied Carballo a COA on his claim that his ‘trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective in denying him his fundamental right.to testify to his version of events to which he stood trial when Petitioner took the stand during the sentencing phase? Did the Fifth Circuit err in failing to address Carballo's appeal on the district court's denial of his motion to stay and motion for an evidentiary hearing regarding this claim?