Whether the Ninth Circuit arbitrarily concluded that Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a Constitutional right, and whether reasonable jurists could debate the district court's procedural and substantive conclusions regarding the Petitioner's legal claims

PRESENTED 1. Whether the Ninth Circuit arbitrarily concluded that Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a Constitutional right? 2. Whether reasonable jurist could debate the district court's conclusion that Petitioner committed a public offense as opposed to presumptive lawful activity under N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v Bruen? 3. Whether reasonable jurist could debate the district court's procedural holding that Petitioner had the opportunity to litigate his claim under Stone v Powell and Townsend v Sain? 4. Whether the Deputy District Attorney ("DDA") failure to produce evidence relating to the purported resisting, underlying suspicion and officer Rardin’s credibility at preliminary hearing/ motion to suppress evidence constituted a violation of Petitioner's rights as described in Brady v Maryland and/or Napue v Illinois? 5. Whether there was reasonable or probable cause and/or all the elements satisfied at trial based on sufficient evidence under Bunkley v Florida and/or Fiore v White? i