whether-federal-habeas-petitioner-deprived-of-constitutional-rights-to-due-process

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED } QUESTION No. 1: Whether a federal habeas petitioner is deprived of his constitutional riahts to Due Process as implicated hy the 14TH Amendment to the tmited States Constitution to meaningful appellate review when a federal appellate court fails to consider and address the issue or igsves upon which a certificate of appealability was granted? fA). The Petitioner was deprived of his constitutional rights to Due Process under the 14TH Amendment to the United States Constitution because the Panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit fail to consider and address the issues woon which the certificate of appealability (COA) was granted. QUESTION No. 2: Whether the Substantial Availability Test announced . by the United States Court of Appeals for the Pifth Circnit in Moore v. Quaterman, 534 F.3d 454 (5th Cir. 2008) deviates from or is contrary to the Court's consensus in Schulp v. Delo; 115 S.ckh. 851 (1995), MeQuiggin v. Perkins, 133 S.Ct. 1924 (2014) and the pane] decision in Bosley v. Cain; 409 F.3d 657 (5th Gir. 2005) holding that an actual innocence claim requires a habeas petitioner toe supnort his allegation of constitutional error with new reliable evidence, whether it’ be exculpatory scientific evidence, trustworthy eyewitness accounts, or critical physical evidence; that was not presentediat trial for exclusion, or unavailability, or available and not presented at trial? (A). The court of appeals erred by holding that the information relied upon by the Petitioner was not newly discovered evidence or new evidence because it was in reach of the Petitioner, when such information had been withheld by the State in violation of Brady v. Marviand. 82 8,Ck. 1194 (19643) as to overcome the l-year limitation period, as such evidence was not presented at trial. i . i