Did the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals err in denying a Certificate of Appealability (COA) consistent with statutory and precedential standards for reviewing ineffective assistance of counsel claims?

Did the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals err in denying a Certificate of Appealability (“COA”) consistent with the standards set by 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) and by this Court in Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 327 (2003) and Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000), to review the holdings of the district court that Mr. Burleson was not deprived of due process of law and a fair trial by ineffective assistance of trial counsel because he failed to have Mr. Burleson thoroughly examined for psychiatric, medical, social and personal information to obtain facts and arguments for suppression of evidence, plea bargaining, determination of guilt, and mitigation at sentencing?