Does Counsel's failure to expand on the record and file pre and post hearing briefs for the petitioner's arguments, and make specific objections to the report and recommendations of a Magistrate Judge and identify what portion of the record in which petitioner objects and not object in a footnote stating, 'Same oral arguments as,' enough to satisfy cause and prejudice, in an initial review collateral proceeding pursuant to Martinez v. Ryan?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED | oo A eviden tary heacing 1S granted , : | Does Coun gels t ailuce to expand on the recocd ) | oo and file pce and post hearing brie£s f o¢ the petitioners atguinends, and mahe specific objections +o the report and reccommendations z ofa Magistrate Sudge and identify wha portion of the cecocd in which petitioner objects and not abject in a footnote oo Staking,” Same oral acqvements as, enough to satishy @ause and prejudice , in aninitial ceview collatecal proceeding yeucsuant 6 Martiner vRyan Sctise thug af feeking the intesrty of the proceedings presen ted.