Whether the Ninth Circuit utilized an unduly burdensome certificate-of-appealability standard that contravenes Supreme-Court-precedent

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW I. Whether Review Is Warranted Because The Ninth Circuit Utilized An Unduly Burdensome Certificate Of Appealability Standard That Contravenes This Court And Ninth Circuit Precedent In Refusing To Issue A Certificate Of Appealability. Even Though Reasonable Jurists Could Debate That Petitioner Was Denied His Constitutional Rights Where Petitioner’s Trial Counsel Admitted That He Failed To Object To The Lack Of A Lesser-Included Offense Instruction? II. Whether Review Is Warranted Because The Ninth Circuit Utilized An Unduly Burdensome Certificate Of Appealability Standard That Contravenes This Court’s, and Ninth Circuit Precedent, On The Denial Of A Certificate Of Appealability, Even Though Reasonable Jurists Could Debate That Petitioner Was Denied His Constitutional Rights Where His Trial Counsel Failed To Object To The Lack Of A Willits Instruction Allowing The Jury To Make A Negative Inference Against The State? Il. Whether Review Is Warranted Because The Ninth Circuit Utilized An Unduly Burdensome Certificate Of Appealability Standard Which Contravenes Unanimous Precedent In Denying A Certificate Of Appealability, Even Though Reasonable Jurists Could Debate That Petitioner Was Denied His Constitutional Rights When His Trial Counsel Failed To Duly Investigate Exculpatory Evidence And Witnesses? IV. Whether Review Is Warranted Because The Ninth Circuit Imposed An Unduly Burdensome Certificate Of Appealability Standard In Denying A Certificate Of Appealability, Which i Contravenes This Court’s Precedent, Even Though Reasonable Jurists Could Debate Whether Petitioner Was Factually Innocent? il