Did the lower courts err in applying the standard for determining whether a certificate of appealability should issue in a post-conviction proceeding, in deciding that petitioner had not presented a debatable issue on which reasonable jurists could disagree – whether petitioner received ineffective assistance of counsel when his first attorney admitted that he did insufficient work to be ready for trial from January 2018 to July 2019, the date that the district court denied any further trial continuances, forcing petitioner to hire additional counsel to prepare for and try the case three months later in October 2019?

Whether the lower courts erred in applying the standard for determining a certificate of appealability in a post-conviction proceeding involving ineffective assistance of counsel