Did the Sixth Circuits denial of a COA decide the important federal question related to sufficiency of the evidence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt in a way that disregards the decisions of this Court holdings in In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, and Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, and 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(2)?

Whether due process extends to the representation of counsel on habeas corpus review, and if due process requires counsels conduct to meet the Sixth Amendment standard as this court held in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668or at a minimum laws of agency?

Can hired counsel for the purposes of representation during habeas corpus review be deemed ineffective counsel? Can this ineffectiveness of counsel on habeas review allow for review of the higher courts?

Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit impose an improper and unduly burdensome certificate of Appealability standard that contravenes this courts precedent and deepens a four-circuit split when it denied Ronald Wolters COA to review his 2254 Habeas petition?

Whether the Sixth Circuit's denial of a Certificate of Appealability improperly applied standards for habeas corpus review and ineffective assistance of counsel