Does the District Court and Fifth Circuit's ruling conflict with Supreme Court precedents regarding ineffective assistance of counsel claims, appointment of counsel, and access to courts?

QUESTION PRESENTED: DOES THE DISTRICT COURT AND FIFTH CIRCUIT'S RULING CONFLICT WITH Casey v. Lewis, 518 U.S. 343 n.3 (1996), WHEN HOLDING THAT PETITIONER COULD NOT PRESENT A NONFRIVOLOUS ARGUABLE . 7 CLAIM TO THE’ STATE:HABEAS::COURT TO APPOINT HIM COUNSELPER Trevino ve Thaler, 569 U.S. 413 (2013), TO PROPERLY PRESENT HIS SUBSTANTIAL INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF TRIAL COUNSEL (IATC) CLAIM(S) OR EXCUSE HIS PROCEDURAL ERROR? . . SECOND QUESTION PRESENTED: DOES THE DISTRICT COURT AND FIFTH CIRCUIT'S RULING CONFLICT WITH Trevino, WHEN HOLDING THAT TREVINO IS INAPPLICABLE TO PETITIONER'S CASE? THIRD QUESTION PRESENTED: DOES THE DISTRICT COURT AND FIFTH CIRCUIT'S RULING CONFLICT WITH BUGK v. Davis, 580 U.S. 100 (2017), WHEN HOLDING THAT THE RULE 60(b)(6) COURT DID NOT HAVE TO REVIEW THE MERITS OF PETITIONER'S SUBSTANTIAL IATC CLAIMS BECAUSE Buck IS INAPPLICABLE TO PETITIONER'S CASE? . FOURTH QUESTION PRESENTED: DOES THE DISTRICT COURT AND FIFTH CIRCUIT'S RULING CONFLICT WITH Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817 (1977); and Lewis, 518 U.S. 342 (1996), WHEN HOLDING THAT NOTWITHSTANDING THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL PRISON LAW LIBRARY RULES AND POLICIES WHICH PROHIBITS: i PRISONERS TO TALK AND HELP EACH OTHER PREPARE HABEAS PETITIONS AND THERE BEING NO PERSON TRAINED IN LAW WORKING IN THE LAW LIBRARY, SUCH DEFICLENCIES DID NOT DENY PETITIONER ACCESS TO THE COURTS? i a, ie