Whether federal courts should or must consider the restrictive standards for granting habeas relief under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. Whether federal courts should or must consider the restrictive standards for granting habaes relief under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, 110 Stat. 1214, 28 U.S.C. §2254(d), when deciding whether the petitioner has made the "substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right" required for issuance of the certificate of appealability prerequisite to appeal from the denial of federal habaes relief under 28 U.S.C. §2254. 2. Whether Williams was entitled to a certificate of appealability on his claim that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel due to appellate counsel”s failure to appeal the following claim which was fully preserved ; in the record: Newly discoverd evidence based on the multiple admissions both before and after trial by the state's primary witness, Rosario Fuentez, that his trial testimony against Williams was false and that Williams in fact was not involved in Fuentez's commission of the charged offense. 3. Whether Williams was entitled to a certificate of appealability on his claim that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel due to appellate counsel's failure to argue the following claim in the court of appeals: Reversal is appropriate in the interest of justice on the grounds that the real controversy was not fully tried because the jury was denied : evidence of Fuentez's admissions that Williams in fact was not involved in the charged offenses, and that Fuentez had only claimed otherwise in order to minimize the consequences of his own i eriminal: conduct. PARTIES IN COURT BELOW Other than the present petitioner and Respondent, =-::. there were no other parties in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. . J di