Whether the state court unreasonably applied SCOTUS precedents in concluding that trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to challenge an eyewitness identification as unreliably suggestive

QUESTION PRESENTED The question presented is whether the state court unreasonably applied this Court’s precedents when it concluded that Evans’s trial counsel was not constitutionally ineffective for failing to challenge the sole testifying eyewitness’s identification as unreliably suggestive, after acknowledging the entire case hinged on identification. 1