Should a certificate of appealability issue due to ineffective assistance of appellate counsel?

QUESTION PRESENTED Acriminal defense attorney has a duty to provide vigorous advocacy. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688 (1984). “The right to the effective assistance of counsel is thus the right of the accused to require the prosecution’s case to survive the crucible of meaningful adversarial testing.” United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648, 655 (1984). The question presented is this: Should a certificate of appealability issue because reasonable jurists would debate whether a criminal defendant was deprived of the effective assistance of appellate counsel when she failed to file a reply brief, waived oral argument, and refused to file a petition for rehearing or certiorari even though the Ninth Circuit held the defendant’s Fourth Amendment claim was a “close call” and a third judge would have reversed but for a decision that was clearly distinguishable?