1. Whether the lower courts provided sufficient and adequate process to test the legality of Petitioner's Detention under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and due process jurisprudence, as applied.

2. Whether a court of appeals erred by treating a petitioner's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel as independent from, rather than as potential "cause" for, the procedural default of an underlying prosecutorial misconduct claim, thereby creating an unnavigable procedural bar for meritorious constitutional claims under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

3. Whether the government's knowing use of perjured testimony from a key witness operating under a concealed identity compounded by its failure to correct additional material falsehoods from other witnesses constitutes a structural defect that undermines the fundamental fairness of the trial, and if so, whether a court of appeals may deny a certificate of appealability on procedural grounds without first assessing the profound nature of that underlying violation.

4. Whether the Sixth Circuit misapplied the standard for a certificate of appealability under Slack vs. McDaniel by finding it was not "debatable among jurists of reason" that a petitioner made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, where significant post-conviction evidence confirmed the government's reliance on false testimony and trial counsel's failure to challenge it.

Whether the lower courts provided sufficient process to test the legality of Petitioner's Detention under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and due process jurisprudence