Christopher H. West v. Robert May, Warden, et al.

In denying petitioner's habeas certificate of appealability, where the 3d Circuit’s review of the record entirely overlooked that the facts in trial counsel’s statement established a violation of due process and 6th amendment violation per Deck v. Missouri, 544 U.S. 622 (2005), and these facts were required to be reviewed in the state court’s decision yet never considered, would jurists of reason find it debatable that the petitioner made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right requiring a reversal of the 3d Circuit’s erroneous review?

Where the District Court erroneously applied deference under 2254(d) to a state court review that was a decision contrary to state- law procedural principles, with the petitioner providing the missing statement of trial counsel for rebuttal pursuant to 2254(e)(1) when these facts establish the narrow application of the presumed prejudice