Was trial counsel ineffective?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. WAS TRIAL COUNSEL INEFFECTIVE FOR FAILING TO CONDUCT ANY PRETRIAL INVESTIGATIONS TO AT LEAST INTERVIEW POTENTIAL WITNESSES THAT COULD HAVE SUPPORTED PETITIONERS VERSION OF EVENTS, THAT HE DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE FATAL ASSAULT ON THE VICTIM? 2. BASED ON THE FACTS SURROUNDING PETITIONERS CAS WAS IT A REASONABLE AND INFORMED STRATEGIC DECISION BY TRIAL COUNSEL NOT TO OBJECT TO TAYLORS HIGHLY PREJUDICIAL AND IRRELEVANT TESTIMONY PERTAINING HOW. PETITIONER WAS CUT IN HIS FACE? 3. DID TRIAL COUNSEL MAKE A REASONABLE AND STRATEGIC DECISION TO ALLOW THE PETITIONER TO TESTIFY ABOUT OBTAINING A FRAUDULAENT PASSPORT FROM HAITI TO RETURN TO THE UNITED STATES? 4. DID TRIAL COUNSEL GIVE A REASONABLE JUSTIFICATION AT THE EVIDENTIARY HEARING FOR FAILING TO OBJECT TO ALL OF THE HIGILY PREJUDICIAL TESTIMONY EVEN AFTER A SIDEBAR WAS CALLED FOR BY THE TRIAL COURT TO ACERTAIN WHY TRIAL COUNSEL FAILED TO MAKE ANY OBJECTIONS ? : 5. DID TRIAL COUNSEL RENDER DEFICIENT REPRESENTATION WHEN HE , FAILED TO PROPERLY PREPARE PETITIONER TO TESTIFY ON HIS OWN _ BEHALF? : 6. DID TRIAL COUNSELS CUMULATIVE ERRORS AMOUNT TO PETITIONERS UNCONSTITUTIONAL CONVICTION? 7. DID THE PCR COURT MAKE A REASONABLE FINDING UNDER THE STRICKLAND/FRITZ STANDARD SUPPORTED BY THE EVIDENTIARY HEARING RECORD THAT PETITIONERS TRIAL COUNSELS REPRESENTATION SATISFIED THE CONSTITUTIONAL SAFEGUARDS GUARANTEED BY BOTH THE UNITED STATES AND NEW JERSEY CONSTITUTIONS? / 1