Whether the district court erred in rejecting the petitioner's claim within his § 2255 motion that pre-trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective for allowing the prosecution to present false material DNA evidence and false material evidence at his trial that misrepresented the evidence of the case, for failure to properly cross-examine witnesses, and for failure to argue on direct appeal and point out to the Eleventh Circuit that the district court stated on the record that admitting the petitioner's 1995 bank robbery conviction to the jury would be 'pretty prejudicial' and that 'the probative value is slight'

QUESTION PRESENTED I , auld reasonable turi: disaqree_yilth the District Courts veiection 0 = petition s claim within his_22 § 2d motion that pre-h Aha i Ale. counsel was constitutions ineffective for allowing the Prosecutan th | present false material DNA evidence. and false malerinl evidence inke his trial that a ! ” isrepresented toe evidence of the case; for Failure. to properly cross-examine rthnesses; Oo nderstand_conc ering. testifying for Ag reeing And.stipulating. to the admission of _ | IX occasions throughout the trial), rshen Pb tioner did not take the stand oa _leshi: he 2010 bank nobbery trial, AS such Admission of Petitioners __. | minal histo AS Looproper And highly preiudicsal fo Allure to effect l Argue. on direc Lappeal_And point-out te the Lleventh | = Circuit that the District | ourl stated on the record that Ip adm elitibner's 1295 bank robbery conviction __ othe jury would be “pretty prejudicial and that “the probahive value fs iP ue tor Lailure to equies A nistral_o a Angue oh Appeal that the — | Proseculion committed misconduct throughout the trial; And that the | plAtion 1 due_process or because the Dishiict Court tetused to grant an ___ | den i eA na on Pe Hone’ 7 | : | pporting Attidalt, din he Eleventh Civcatt evr intuling that he failed te make _ r (a)? “ _ | | PAR DTHE PROCEED) | i fl PAVILES ADPeCAF ihn ine cCAPl/ipn a DL. LASL The Cover pAge | | —_. pee u, AB OF COA A QU OA PRESENTED . : [ ABLE OF CONTED iif ee ABLE DFAUTHORITIES ye | NDEX OF APPENDICES. | OPINIONS. BELOUS 5 pe gp ! URiSD my, L : l OM STITUTIONWAL PROVISIONS INVOLVED | ATEMQENT OF THE CASL : : the Apel | he Certificate Of Appeslability (cor ; iF ASONS FOR GRANTING. THE LIB ; | ertiovar! Should B anied Because Reasonable durists Could ibnqueshanab : ! Debate lhether Y ALING Demon strated, Bott “Cause "“And."Preyudice “a | hat He blas Provided Lith Inefective Assistance Of Counsel In Violation = __ | his Sixth Amendment And Also That He Me The_heguired Standards ___ ao __...0¢ This Courts Precedent And Federal. Statate Io be Granted ACOA, IT. Re AsonAble sts Could Unquestionably Debate dlhether The Eleventh Cirewits 4, ___ l onclusion [hat Mer. STERLING Failed In Yhake A Substantial Showing Of The I Denial af A anstitubenal Right lias £cr,And In Contlict Udith This Courts ___ ne OWL USLON gg ph | vi. | OR TABLE OF AUTHORITIE: l New es: Pre aan vy. KERNER 909 U.S.5, ? : woody Po _ DULLER EL OCKR 37 .$.3.22 (2003) 134A, Né ACK ve DA) £4.5.473(2000) a ——A4* I oe l TRICKLAND ¥. LJAS WING DM WSUS EUR. I tu DYST, Amend a | ! a BUSL§ 22530). 2h ee WUS.CE 2 , 1-4, 2,343,135 15, lh I _ I ed. R. Ewe, YO¥CA i, bi, en [Pet Ca FO ia a Mb | I | _— $$$ _ | iW, NDEX OF APPEND I Order_o he United Ale. Q 0 Appeals d fe £/oyven ; wi, Dentr ; . l of COA on 28 U.S.C.§ 2255 Matter (March 20/9), and Denial of Reconsilerahin | Mo May 22,2019 ee ee | —Order. of the United States District Court. for the Northern District of Georgia, we Dental of 8 U.S.C. § 2255, and COA (March 5, 20182. a | A DPENG | tap nd Bema Une Sts Misha de ab Yh nib Sts —_—. Distr Cou oy the No hern Dis: it ot bee an (Aue 0) | Opinion of The United Sts ‘Court of Appeals tor the Fleventh Circuit, Denil ef Direc? Apa! (Rnersber 21,2012) _ a Append A a UpOyes: on ileA 14 ‘TAN Xcerpl, page } PreHeart, T¥An 4h 55,58, 74,25, 85, 90,102,103,109,1Y LS, 12%, 14S, LTS, 17h, 180,19), I 123,229,225, 226,232, 281,259,256, 257,258, 250 27V, 397,350,408, _ _ -[F — F947, 498 ISN IS 2, _ —_ _ . | A pends Fo I murna Police Dept. Property & Evidence Record ; Sworn Arrest Warranh L Mt Sg Oe Renin a | OC PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORAR 7 preview the iucdament of the United Ale ourt of Appeals tor the Bleventh Ci : ts he March 27,2b11,And May 22,2012, Order of the United States Court of Appeals i | forthe Eleventh Circuit, denying JM. STERLING a Certificate. at Appealsbility (COA) is Available at, 2019 US. App LEXUS 142, And_AUached As AppendicA. The March 5,208, l RLING NAbeA elief And_A OA_is AvAil