Whether third-party affidavits filed with a motion to withdraw a guilty plea before sentencing, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel, overcomes a defendant's heavy burden to show that his statements about counsel's effectiveness at the plea colloquy were false and that a fair and just reason existed for him to withdraw his guilty plea under Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(d)(2)(B)?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED : I. Whether third-party affidavits filed with a motion to withdraw a guilty plea before sentencing, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel, overcomes a defendant's heavy burden to show that his statements about counsel's effectiveness at the plea colloquy were false and that a fair and just reason existed for him to withdraw his guilty plea under Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(d)(2)(B)? II. Whether a district court's use of relevant conduct in dismissed or unconvicted charges at sentencing for U.S.S.G. § 2G2.2 is an end run around a defendant's constitutional protections, which has created a split in the circuits, and whether counsel's failure to properly object to the use of this conduct qualifies as ineffective assistance of counsel? III. Whether a denied motion to withdraw a guilty plea before sentenceing, due to ineffective assistance of counsel, prevents a defendant from having his ineffective assistance of counsel claims reviewed during a Title 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceeding? : Iv. Whether a district court can deny a Title 28 U.S.C. § 2255, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel, without judging the reasonableness of counsel's challenged conduct on the facts of the defendant's case, as . required by Strickland v. Washington? V. Whether an ineffective assistance of counsel claim is procedurally barred, during an application for a certificate of appealability submitted to a court of appeals, if a defendant asserted an ineffective claim on direct appeal to preserve the arguement, but the court of appeals defered resolution of the claim until the § 2255 stage and never responded to any ‘of defendant's ineffective claims?