for the purpose of manufacturing, distributing, and using methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 856(a)(1). Williams was sentenced to concurrent terms of 360 and 240 months. This court affirmed his convictions on direct appeal in 2002. United States v. Williams, 42 Fed. Appx. 379 (10th Cir.2002). The facts of the case are set out in that prior order and judgment and need not be repeated here. We granted COA on three issues: (1) whether Williams’ due process rights were violated when his trial counsel denied him the right to testify on his own behalf; (2) whether Williams received constitutionally ineffective assistance of counsel when his trial counsel (a) denied him his right to testify, and (b) failed to object to testimony regarding the guilty plea of a non-testifyin Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). Further, the district court determined that
holding that habeas proceedings are not available to test the legality of matters which should have been raised on direct appeal holding that this court follows the rule that nonconstitutional sentencing errors that have not been raised on direct appeal have been waived and generally may not be reviewed by way of 28 usc  2255 holding that  2255 is not available to test the legality of matters which should have been raised on appeal quotation omitted holding ineffectivetrialassistance claim may be brought in 28 usc  2255 proceeding regardless of whether claim could have been raised on direct appeal holding  2255es savings clause applies to a claim i that is based on a retroactively applicable supreme court decision which establishes that the petitioner may have been convicted of a nonexistent offense and ii that was foreclosed by circuit law at the time when the claim should have been raised in the petitioners trial appeal or first  2255 motion