Was court-appointed counsel's decision not to seek video footage of alleged victim's prior acts of violence a violation of the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED lk Sid courfappointed counsel deprive Petitioner of the Sixth Amendment guarantee fo the effective assistance of counsel in purportedly making a Strategic decision not te seek to obtain video footage of the alleged victim's specific prier gets of violence 7 Zz. bid court-a ointed counsel 5 aet of misleading Petitioner inte believing all efforts te ‘ obtain the vide footage were being made create an adversarial conftict resulting in a construcfive denial of counsel, in violation of the Sixth Amendment 7 3, Under these circumstances, was Petitioner 'g waiver of counsel voluntary under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments? 1 p ; F A , oy? “ | ihe prosecution's ailure fo have preserve > titioner's due proces rights violated by +h prosee von : *. we re bduced for the, defense the requested video footage invielation of the Fourteenth Amendment Ks 5. Was Petitioner's due process of law rights violated by the prosecution's introduction as Substantive evidence of gui I} an unauthenticated bYb of the altercation in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment 2 6, Was fetitioner deprived of his right to confrentatien of witnesses by the admi sion of Bvb surveillance evidence Via the investigating defective who testified the alleged victim +old him the acte depicted therein were how he sustained his injuries ina hospital internew in violation 2 SK mendment 7 ;