Did Mr. Rieber's trial counsel provide constitutionally ineffective assistance?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Did Mr. Rieber’s trial counsel provide constitutionally ineffective assistance by failing to pursue a lesser included alternative defense and failing to develop obvious mitigating evidence? 2. Is the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals’ practice of refusing to review ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claims solely based on the absence in the record of counsel’s reasons for making key decisions contrary to the rights established by the Court in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984)? 3. Did Alabama’s capital sentencing scheme, which permitted a judge to reject the jury’s sentencing verdict, violate the Sixth Amendment right to a trial by jury and, if so, should that holding apply to Mr. Rieber? i