Whether an attorney's decision to forego a viable defense can be considered 'strategic' if the attorney misunderstood the law

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. Whether the court of appeals improperly denied the Petitioner a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) on his claim that his ineffective assistance of counsel claim — and specifically — whether an attorney’s decision to forego presenting a viable defense (in this case entrapment) can ever be considered “strategic” if the attorney misunderstood the law regarding the defense. 2. Whether the court of appeals improperly applied the “reasonable jurists could debate” certificate of appealability standard articulated by the Court in Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322 (2008). il B. PARTIES INVOLVED The parties involved are identified in the style of the case. iii