Whether the Eleventh Circuit's analysis of ineffective assistance of counsel during jury selection violated Strickland v. Washington standards and whether the circuit court improperly denied a certificate of appealability under Martinez v. Ryan and Shinn v. Ramirez

1. Whether the Eleventh Circuit’s truncated no -prejudice analysis on Petitioner’s claim that counsel was ineffective during jury selection violated the standard set forth in Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668 (1984) , which requires courts to consider all of “counsel’s errors” and consider the “totality of the evidence” in assessing prejudice. 2. Whether the Eleventh Circuit violate d the certificate of appealability (COA) standard when it denied Petitioner a COA on his state -court -recordbased arguments under Martinez v. Ryan , 566 U.S. 1 (2012) , because it is at least reasonably debatable whether such arguments survive Shinn v. Ramirez , 596 U.S. 366 (2022) . 3. Whether the Eleventh Circuit overstep ped the “reasonable jurists could debate” standard for obtaining a COA when it denied Petitioner a COA on his claim under Caldwell v. Mississippi , 472 U.S. 320 (1985), which Justices of this Court actually debated at an earlier stage of his case. ii LIST OF DIRECTLY