Whether a State Court's erroneous denial of a criminal defendant's Sixth Amendment Right to be represented by counsel of choice resulted in a decision that was contrary to or involved an unreasonable application of clearly established Federal law

No question identified. : QUESTION’S PRESENTED 1. Whether a State Court's erroneous denial of a , criminal defendant's Sixth Amendment Right to be represented by counsel of choice, resulted : in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of "clearly established" Federal law as determined by the Supreme Court, of : : the United States? 2. Whether a State Court's erroneous denial of a criminal defendant's Sixth Amendment Right to be represented by counsel of choice, meet the restrictive Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act(AEDPA), which put restrictions on Federal courts hearing petitions by State prisoners? ;