This case raises the question of whether an attorney can be found to
have rendered effective assistance of counsel where he failed to review a
significant portion of discovery, failed to interview and call witnesses
provided by a defendant who asserted the witnesses would provide
exculpatory evidence, failed to consult and call an expert at trial to support
the defense where the government called an expert witness and the jury
instructions involved securities laws, failed to subpoena, preserve and obtain
evidence that the defendant informed was exculpatory and went to the heart
of the matter, and where the attorney created an adversarial relationship
with his client that prevented him from adequately and zealously
representing his client, and in consequence, impeded the attorney from
properly preparing his client to testify at his first trial.

Whether an attorney provided effective assistance of counsel