When a court issues a procedural ruling not to extend the benefits of a new rule collaterally to those who did not preserve their claim, does the Sixth Amendment protect a criminal defendant from the ineffectiveness of his counsel who admitted reviewing such a claim but chose not to raise it in past proceedings on the incorrect belief that it was not viable, which was contrary to available law at that time

Questions Presented 1. When a court issues a procedural ruling not to extend the benefits of a new rule collaterally to those who did not preserve their claim, does the Sixth Amendment protect a criminal defendant from the ineffectiveness of his counsel who admitted reviewing such a claim but chose not to raise it in past proceedings on the incorrect belief that it was not viable, which was contrary to available law at that time. 2. Whether the right to equal protection of the law is violated by Massachusetts’s “gatekeeper” provision (M.G.L. c. 278, §33E) for the review of first-degree murder appeals from adverse postconviction decisions because said defendants are being treated differently than all others seeking review of a collateral claim brought in the first available instance due to predecessor counsel’s ineffectiveness and the absence of an adequate record on direct appeal to ensure that it was reviewed on its merits.