Whether an unreasoned blanket denial of a certificate of appealability conflicts with 28 U.S.C. § 2253 and Supreme Court precedents

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Should this Court resolve a split among the courts of appeals and decide whether an unreasoned blanket denial of a certificate of appealability that fails to address whether a petitioner’s specific claims have “some merit” conflicts with 28 U.S.C. § 2253 and this Court’s precedents by effectively precluding a habeas petitioner from seeking meaningful federal appellate review? 2. Do Petitioner’s claims that trial counsel was ineffective due to his failure to investigate and present mental health evidence in support of his chosen defense and his failure to object to a jury instruction that lessened the prosecution’s burden of proof in contravention of In re Winship, and that the prosecution suppressed material, exculpatory evidence, have at least “some merit” and thus meet the standards for a COA? i