Was Mr. Daniels denied effective-assistance-of-counsel

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED CLAIM ONE WAS MR. DANIELS DENIED EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL AT TRIAL WHERE DEFENSE COUNSEL HAD TO BE REPEATEDLY REPRIMANDED BY THE TRIAL COURT FOR FAILING TO EXAMINE WITNESSES PROPERLY AND FOR ARGUING WITH THE COURT? CLAIM TWO WAS MR. DANIELS DENIED THE EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL AT TRIAL WHERE COUNSEL FAILED TO PRESENT AN OPENING STATEMENT, COMPLETE HIS CLOSING ARGUMENT, WHEN ADVISED OF A TIME LIMIT, BASED ON THE FACT COUNSEL HAD NOT YET ADDRESSED THE EVIDENCE, THEREBY FAILING TO EVER INFORM THE JURY OF MR. DANIELS THEORY OF THE CASE? CLAIM THREE WAS MR. DANIELS DENIED HIS STATE AND FEDERAL FIFTH AMENDMENT DUE PROCESS RIGHTS, BY THE ACTIONS OF THE WAYNE COUNTY PROSECUTOR AND DETROIT POLICE DEPARTMENT WITHHOLDING EXCULPATORY EVDENCE AND OBTAINED HIS CONVICTION THROUGH THE KNOWING USE OF FALSE TESTIMONY AND MANUFACTURED EVIDENCE BY THE PROSECUTOR, MEDICAL EXAMINER, DETROIT POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND COMPLAINING WITNESS MR. DANIELS MAINTAINS HIS CLAIM THAT HE IS ACTUALLY AND LEGALLY INNOCENT? CLAIM FOUR THE TRIAL JUDGE DEMONSTRATED JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT WHEN HE: OPENLY ARGUED WITH DEFENSE COUNSEL; IMPOSED AN EXACT TIME LIMIT ON DEFENSE COUNSEL'S CLOSING ARGUMENT; WALKED OFF THE BENCH DURING DEFENSE COUNSEL’S ARGUMENTS; AND FAILED TO RECOMMEND DEFENSE COUNSEL CONTINUE REPRESENTING PETITIONER DURING CLOSING ARGUMENTS, VIOLATING HIS FIFTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL AND SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO HAVE COUNSEL FOR HIS DEFENSE? i