Whether the Fifth Circuit, in this appeal of the denial of a certificate of appealability, improperly addressed the merits of the habeas claims rather than determining whether "jurists of reason could disagree with the district court's resolution of [petitioner's] constitutional claims or that jurists could conclude the issues presented are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further." Buck v. Davis, 137 S. Ct. 759, 773 (2017).

2. Whether the State's peremptory strike of a Black juror because he belonged to the NAACP constituted unconstitutional race discrimination under Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), where the State failed to offer any credible race-neutral explanation for the strike.

3. Whether Guidry's procedural default of appellate counsel's deficient performance is excused where Texas law required him to file his habeas petition before his direct appeal was concluded.

4. Whether the State may excuse its failure to disclose exculpatory evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), by asserting—with no evidence and contrary to this Court's and other Circuits' holdings—that it had an "open file policy" and without establishing that the exculpatory evidence was present in any files available to defense counsel.

5. Whether trial counsel was ineffective when, during a re-trial, they failed to object to testimony on the basis that, in an earlier habeas case, the Fifth Circuit held that very testimony violated the Confrontation Clause.

6. Whether ineffective assistance of trial counsel in a first trial that prejudiced the defendant in the second trial violates the Sixth Amendment.

7. Whether Guidry's procedural default is excused because habeas counsel failed to investigate and present exculpatory fingerprint and ballistic evidence supporting actual innocence.

Whether the Fifth Circuit improperly addressed the merits of the habeas claims