Whether an attorney's failure to advise a client of the adverse ramifications of raising claims of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal constitutes a substantial denial of a constitutional right

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR-REVIE Wo 1 As a matter of first impreSsion in this court. pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 10(C), does an attorney’s failure to advise his client of the adverse ramifications of raising any claims of IAC. on direct appeal constitute the substantial denial of a constitutional right, debatable among jurist of reasons, as contemplated by this court’s decision in Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000), particularly when the district court failed to conduct an evidentiary hearing to resolve the issue, where petitioner had material evidence showing that his attorney never consulted with him. in . that regard? IL. . ; Does the Seventh Circuit's denial of Miller’s request for a COA, grounded in Miller’s . contentions that the prosecution failed to timely clisclose its use of fabricated evidence in search and arrest warrants, constitute an issue debatable among jurist of reason, pursuant to Slack v. McDaniels, the substantial denial of a constitutional right. and most importantly, does this decision conflict with this court’s decision in Bradv v. Marvland, 373 US. 83, so as lo warrant . the grant of certiorari by this court under Supreme Court Rule 10(C)? I. Does the Seventh circuit’s denial of Miller's request for a Certificate of Appealability on two separate pre-trial. 4" and 5 Amendment, IAC issues—one citing Brown v. Illinois, 422 US. 590 (1975) and the other, Franks v. Delaware. 438 U.S. 154 (1978}—constitute decisions debatable among jurist of reason. pursuant to Slack v. McDaniel, and moreover, substantially conflict with this court’s decisions in Kimmelman v. Morrision. 477 U.S. 365 (1986), so as to warrant the grant of certiorari by this court under Supreme Court Rule 10(c), particularly when the information utilized in the search and arrest warrants were derived from undisclosed, fabricated information and evidence in violation of Brady? : 1 } . TT TI .