Whether the Court of Appeals egregiously misapplied this Court's standard for issuing a certificate of appealability in the face of a substantial showing of the denial of constitutional rights

This is a federal habeas corpus appeal. Mark Douglas Huber , an Idaho prisoner, is serving a sentenc e of 30 years in prison based on his convictions for rape and lewd conduct with a minor. Over the last 14 years, Huber has maintained his innocence , and he did not receive a fair trial . Among other constitutional errors , a police officer perjured himself when he testified that Huber had confessed to him, and an expert witness was allowed to testify about another lab analyst’s findings on critical forensic evidence , which this Court has held is a Confrontation Clause violation . In his federal hab eas petition, Huber claimed, among other constitutional issues, that his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process was violated from th e State’s use of the perjured testimony and that his trial counsel was ineffective under the Sixth Amendment in failing to object to the expert’s testimony on Confrontation Clause grounds. But, d espite his long journey through the state and federal courts, t hese constitutional errors have never been heard on their merits , much less corrected, because of the State’s application of arbitrary procedural bars . Huber remains detained in state custody in violation of his constitutional rights. And the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has denied Huber even the opportunity to appeal the dismissal of his habeas petition when it denied his request for a certificate of appealability. This petition raises the following question : Whether the Court of Appeals egregiously misapplied this Court’s standard for issuing a certificate of appealability in the face of a substantial showing of the denial of constitutional right s.