Question not identified.

During her criminal trial, Christin Bilotti’s defense counsel attempted to object to the use of a peremptory strike on a Jehovah’s Witness , stating “That’s a religious based strike .” The trial court held Batson does not extend to religio us affiliation . Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed her conviction and held it was unconstitutional to strik e the juror due to religious faith . However, the Florida Supreme Court quashed that decision , finding trial counsel failed to preserve the issue for appeal. Ms. Bilotti moved for post -conviction relief . She argued her attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to preserve a meritorious issue for appeal. The post-conviction court s denied her relief because, under state law , she had to show a biased juror served on her panel to prove she was prejudice d. On habeas review , a federal court concluded the prejudice analysis was reasonable. The Eleventh Circuit granted Ms. Bilotti a certificate of appealability (COA) that limited briefing to the issue of prejudice . But it affirmed under a different rationale , one that was n either raised by the state nor adopted by a ny prior court, i.e., there was no deficient perform ance because it was unclear whether Batson prohibited religious -based strikes at the time of her trial. This petition presents the following questions: 1. May a federal court of appeals deviate from a question certified in a COA and affirm based on a n alternative ruling that was not raised by the state, ii briefed by the habeas petitioner, or previously adopted by any court? 2. Do the protections of Batson extend to peremptory strikes based on religious affiliation ?