Whether the Ninth Circuit's refusal to issue a certificate of appealability categorically ignored the petitioner's habeas issues and conflicted with Supreme Court precedent on racial animus

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW In Pefia-Rodriguez v. Colorado, 580 U.S. 206 (2017), this Court again condemned the use of racial animus in the sexual assault trial of a Mexican man, when, during deliberations, a juror said that “nine out of ten Mexican men were guilty of being aggressive toward women and young girls.” Here, ineffective trial counsel allowed the Government to taint Shah’s bribery corruption trial with racial animus opinion that people from India, like Petitioner, were culturally predisposed to corruption. Therefore, the question presented is: Given that the trial court found ineffective assistance of counsel when defense counsel failed to object to testimony that people from India were culturally predisposed to corruption, but that such evidence caused no prejudice, did the Ninth Circuit’s refusal to issue a certificate of appealability categorically ignore Shah’s multiple habeas issues and directly conflict with this Court’s standard and racial animus precedent in Buck v. Davis", Miller-El?, and Pefia-Rodriguez v. Colorado? 1 Buck v. Davis, 580 U.S. 100, 120-21 (2017). ? Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003).