Whether the Fifth Circuit's denial of a certificate of appealability

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Whether the Fifth Circuit's denial of a certificate of appealability, where the district court erred or alternatively abused its discretion by concluding that Mr. Mathes' appellate counsel made a sound strategic decision not to appeal the preserved sentencing objections, is irreconcilable with controlling precedent, such that this Court should remand to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit with instructions to issue a certificate of appealability? Whether the Fifth Circuit's denial of a certificate of appealability, where the district court erred or alternatively abused its discretion in finding that Mr. Mathes' showing of prejudice from appellate counsel's deficiencies was lacking, based on that Court's view that had Mr. Mathes prevailed on appeal and the matter been remanded for resentencing without application of the erroneous inflation of the drug quantity and the inadequately supported leadership enhancement, the district court could have imposed the same sentence because the guidelines are only advisory, is irreconcilable with controlling precedent, such that this Court should remand to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit with instructions to issue a certificate of appealability? Whether the Fifth Circuit’s denial of a certificate of appealability, where the district court erred or alternatively abused its discretion in refusing to conduct an evidentiary hearing on Mr. Mathes' claim that he was ' 7 5 -lldeprived of the effective assistance of counsel during the appellate stage of his criminal case by counsel's failure to appeal his sentence, based on the erroneous inflation of the drug quantity used to set Mr. Mathes' base offense level and application of an inadequately supported : leadership enhancement, is irreconcilable with controlling precedent, such that this Court should remand to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit with instructions to issue a certificate of appealability? | | -iii|