Is a criminal defendant entitled to a COA when he has demonstrated and made a substantial showing that his rights were denied under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, where reasonable jurists could determine or debate, as evidenced by the varying approaches used by the Federal Circuits in determining, during a Faretta hearing, whether or not a defendant has knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to counsel, and decides to represent himself after the hearing?

QUESTION PRESENTED Jason Devon Lenoir was convicted of the offense of sexual intercourse without consent as a result of a guilty plea, in the State of Montana, and desired to represent himself at trial. The court, without the benefit of a psychological evaluation, held a Faretta hearing, and eventually allowed Lenoir to proceed pro se. However, given his youth, and other pertinent factors, the court should have been more assiduous in its colloquy. Lenoir timely filed a Federal a Writ of Habeas corpus, but it, and a COA was denied, and affirmed. He now petitions for a Writ of Certiorari opining that he substantially demonstrated constitutional denials that reasonable jurists could debate were adequate for further proceedings. Thus, the following question is presented: Is a criminal defendant entitled to a COA when he has demonstrated and made a substantial showing that his rights were denied under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, where reasonable jurists could determine or debate, as evidenced by the varying approaches used by the Federal Circuits in determining, during a Faretta hearing, whether or not a defendant has knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to counsel, and decides to represent himself after the hearing?