Whether the Court of Appeals erred in misapplying the Strickland standard and depriving the Appellant of his constitutional rights to due process and effective assistance of counsel

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED L The Court of Appeals erred by misapplying the first prong, and failing to consider the second prong, of the Strickland standard, with respect to the Appellant’s trial counsel’s failure to properly object to extraneous offense testimony. The Court of Appeals has decided an important question of Federal law in a way that conflicts with applicable decisions of other Courts of Appeals, or the Supreme Court of the United States. i. The Texas Court of Appeals has misconstrued a rule or statute in such a way as to deprive Petitioner of his 14" Amendment due process right to confront and cross-examine witnesses in the Crawford case. III. The Texas court of Appeals has misconstrued a rule or statute, and unfairly decided a question of law, in such a way as to deprive Petitioner of the right to effective assistance of counsel under the 6 Amendment, and to deprive Petitioner of his due process right to a fair trial under the 14" Amendment. vi