Whether the district court erred in denying the appellant's claim of ineffective assistance of first instance trial counsel

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED FOL THE wT CTLOC IT (ERROR\ON OBJTIEING THE ARAELUAJIT ME(ELIS) A CERTIFIUATE OF P\ROCEAUARICT MM Q REC ONCIOECATION GR A CEeTIFIOATE OF ARCCEAUARIUTIM 3 OLD WE UNITED SMTES OISTNRIET COrer Re THE _OSTELOT OF “LOAN ERROR AM GIL EL OF ACQGALAGLUT™M., YQ, _OLO TWAE UntTETEO STATES CESTELCY Cort RR THE Olenei ey of WOAno Eee RN OSES EROW SUOWmEVJT 2 REO, ©O(l0) MATION) on) THE MUD TINGS SRawWOs ! A, ROVE WOlo)\) _WISMKE ., “GIAOVERTERNICE ,§ SUCPRISE, OR | EXCIGQABLE WEGLER ® RAE ©O(Wo)(2) Revised 3/24/16 : po eee . Sorta an . ee . G . . ree, Mann pos : : ve 7 . . . ' « . it . ‘ . » . : we ‘ ee tee TT eee oe FE z . t G .. QUESTION(S) PRESENTED ©. ane wolosG@) A, “XY 3S A.) THE TMaAInREST OF SoOSTISETO REISER ELRST ANESMICE TRIAL COWSELS GAIL RE KO CHALLE IGE THE GREED AWD nln) = CONSESITLAL, . 6 WR Od USS UN OGS,80 ED OE Re aN | PWD “ROERFECAINE AGSESTAUCE OF ROST COOVICTTN) COUNSELS GATE TO WAVE RAISED THE SUGBTHWITIVE CUAIW OF “LJIERFECTIOE ASST STAUCE OF CIRST TIS VWICE TRDAL COKOWISGEL Th) Som 120QCBOV\8) Me WE OIsVisT OE —“LOAWO (ERROR\OM QAEWIG “THAT THE APPEUYWIT me (E0055) TWEFREIIVE. AGSISIWICE OF CLAST TWSTAJRE TRDAL SO0N6EL (CLAW 2) HAD OT AEE) _ A SuvBSGMJITIVE CUATW. SE! STM OderLaadV “ V.oaK 20O E.BA L034, 1043, CAT Cif G001), Revised 3/24/16