Whether a reasonable COVID-19 debate

No question identified. : i PETITION FORA WRIT OF CERTIORARI ; Fo A nm Potitionec Whiliem Dawis £2502 pabibions foc a Wet o . Soe Yue Ninkh Mecsit denying, Peritionec on Applicadion For CeckiSicate of f ‘Apoos)oalali : : Questions PacstaTED : Whether o teasona ble \ocisk Covid debate wrhether Pobiionec made Ave sPSDLE SS claim wheres i) Counsel forled +o move. Toro mental exomin-_| | ial ena for Plead oyuilty ; 2) Counsel filed ko advise. Pebhimer of an Snsuniay defense or alrecnosively Soiled to adequately inveshoute, the ; CViccumsteunces Phot led yo Ye offense. nec OPWIONS Berow : (ad) of whith are wnpublished S 1) Ocder of ene Mariccom County Supescioc Court danying rhe perton for postConvichon reliel on April 25,2017 (otbached ———bresicotsane pti eh pre na uen stant ‘ t Soke raiot ppdidt oa RY A c St aG, 2018: pnd Y) Agnial of a” | | Cerbticake, of Appeals Ya lity (CoA) on October 2, 2028 and she Aonial of o | | tequeck foe ox soheoring on November 3, 202-0. l . STATEMENT DE SwrarspieT oA : “The Aistries Couck and no Ninth Ciccvit Cove® of Appeals denied Yok Loner! S Saquest Soc, COA. the Singh order was entered on Novem ber 3, _ 020. This iikion for Cecklocnsi iS Ped within ningky Boys of Mook . : | Qcte. Tn olny, Dated States, SAY US. 2dl O98) , this Covet Weld that, | . von: 3.0. 1350 : + LMeewrd age Oc om panel of o Federal Coyck of Appro\s . ' i) | 4 | STANDARD OF Rewew | | | | ; | Denial of Cech Gicmke of Appas\aloitity A | | | Tn Millec-E\_v. Cockrell, 537 U.S, 393,143 9.0%, 1030 (2003), | basis Courk cloci fied Whe Standards foc issuance of ao COA 0 ! _1++ 0 prisenes saaking CoA neod only emosinate o"sulnStunbiol showing 0 ___-the dimio| of o Constitutional tight. A prisoner satisfies bho Standacd be —-Saanasttubinr, o jucist ob feason fovld Sisuoree. with the district Court! fesolvlinn of We Vilvtional Claims o¢ yhor o jurist Covla Conclude the LoSVeS yorvesenrter @ odenuvate + Aeserve, LnCovrongeme, D_}2 2.0. further. +. We dv nok require peditioner +9 prove, valoce ene_is “ance mofo CDA ot Some sycish Wavld orn ho. 204s bi bor habes ROC pie. Anderd AOL mnbe2 Atbotable oven -hovan 2vecy iuri 0 passen mish Agcee. , after dae COA has yoon gronked ana the case has | rerowed Pll consideration, thet yalibioner will not prevail. Ta 1a% | “site ob 1934 »tiking Slack v. Mc Danie), 534 Uo. 493, Us (2008) STATEMENT OF THE LASE : Y) Paditioner Willian Dewis wis Comvrcked pen he yale. of guilty Gor one Count of Servet Condver with a Minor and hwo combs of Adromples Sexun\ Condver with ao Minec. He was Sendonced tno two derms of Wietime yer , oy the. Superine covct ot Masisoy on County Avizonn on November s AID. _— $< $$ d. On Decembec 1, 2015 , Poritionge Sled a Lime \y Notice. Soc Post Conviction Reliel Cver) of cight. Pebikione co Couct apyonked Per ottomey Vequested 40 withdcaw From Mais cose ofter Piling lis Notice of Completion .%, 1 f _ 9% Post = Conuithion Hewiew on Mey Ib, Bol. Mee Suypectoc tover ranted Cetin hone to Tile bis own POR pebibon gums 000 pec, to eno Patthrones ean ed is Peg pebtign on Felorve, 20 otier beima. ofanted =. g a 2 $244 {i Ya) The OQ XS co denied elie Ovi 52.6 QuAd i mnt Si ik aerition om Avril a AY) “Ths LOS2.6 eu motion Sox 2 ConSsdora tina ——. MA CA D Aecnio : >) On Q@ ile, RO Perdittone NY: Oo time tg gu or tihion t +)d Asizone Covet of Appaols . The Sha o's 0.22 d OAT Onted OUiot) » Vewever denied relief om January AS ,2A019 , “The subsequent maobion Yor T2tonsidoratinn was denied on Folrvory 23, 2018 . | : 4) On Mose\n VA, AOZ, ne Acitono, Suypco me. Coc wren ted Petitioner's wmohikion ba -gihend hime jo File Wis foview padikion by Masel, 21, Ao19. I Marl sys deur, however, i+ AS nob Cle wilh She Acizons Supreme Covet Rieck 33) Moacch a4, 20IS. Navertheso dine Coord Aoniga rhe Ceview) ps i Ytou on August 2%, 20)3. 5. On Jone 42010, Paribioner Nea o Writ of Habeas Lacpvs in. >the Visteced Court, and ao motion +o mynend the Weir of Holens Corpus Pobition frunaed. : suri. ance. ¥ iby 8