Does the requirement to prove prejudice under Lafler v Cooper place a burden on the accused that is deemed unnecessary in United States v Cronic

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED I. Does the requirement to prove prejudice under this Court’s previous |... decision in Lafler v Cooper, place a burden on the accused that this Court Hs ~ deemed unnecessary in United States v Cronic, when an attorney is “totally " absent” from a critical stage of the proceedings? II. Does this Court’s previous decision in Lafler v Cooper, and United States _ Vv Cronic, contradict each other in such a way as to create a vacuum of ; ~ constitutional magnitude that is capable of repetition, yet evading review? . no IIL. Because this Court has previously deemed our system to be a system of plea : bargains, as opposed to a system of trials, and therefore concluding that 5 -. the plea process is almost always a critical stage, does the Sixth “ Avendnent right to effective assistance require counsel to inform his 7 client of any and all plea agreements offered by the prosecutor, including oe _. those offers that the trial court moy refuse to accept, for the reason a ' that the failure to do so would ultimately deny the accused of the entire ; ' critical stage of plea negotiations, that the prosecutor, who by making : such an offer, has demonstrated a willingness to participate in?