Was it an unreasonable application of Strickland-v-Washington,466-U.S.-668-(1984)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Was it an unreasonable application of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) and its progeny for the state courts, and the habeas courts below, to treat an attorney’s decision to call or not call witnesses as a per se strategic decision even where, as here, the witnesses in question were the only ones who could have proven his innocence and trial counsel admitted that the uncalled witness’s testimony would have been helpful to the defense? 2. In a case where the petitioner was accused of shooting at police officers who broke into his family’s home late at night and had an extremely strong defense of mistake, did he receive ineffective assistance of counsel where his attorney committed a cascade of errors that effectively deprived him of that defense, including failure to secure the availability of critical witnesses, failure to call those witnesses, and failure to object to prejudicial rulings, and did the state courts unreasonably apply Strickland, supra, in holding otherwise?