Ineffective-assistance-of-counsel

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED QUESTON NUMBER ONE: Petitioner Lewis’ ex-lawyer provided him with ineffective assistance of counsel by a Motion to Quash and Suppress and failing to conduct adequate pre-trial investigations in regard to Illinois State Trooper Sweeney Racial Profiling in light of selective enforcement of the law , him in violation of his Fourth and Fifth Amendment Rights, thus, did his ex-lawyer violate his Sixth Amendment Rights of the U.S. Constitution ? | QUESTION NUMBER TWO: Whether Petitioner Lewis’ ex-lawyer provided him with ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to conduct pre-trial investigations and | retain an Expert Witness, thus, did his ex-counsel violate his Sixth Amendment Rights of the U.S. Constitution ? | QUESTION NUMBER THREE: | Whether Petitioner Lewis’ ex-lawyer provided him with ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to file a Motion to Suppress Evidence due to Racial Profiling based upon selective enforcement of the law, thus, did his ex-attorney violate his Sixth Amendment Rights of the U.S. Constitution ? | Q UESTION NUMBER FOUR: , Petitioner Lewis, states that did his ex-lawyer provide him with | ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to object to his statutory . enhancement under Section 841 (b) (1) (B); failing to object to his erroneous Career Offender Designation; and failing to object to the PSR sole reliance upon non-Shepard approved documents, thus, did his ex-counsel violate his Sixth Amendment Rights during the sentencing phase ? Question Number Five: Petitioner Lewis, asserts that did his ex-appellate attorney provide him with ineffective assistance of counsel by omitting several non-frivolous claims during his direct appeal proceedings, | thus, did this violate his Sixth Amendment Rights of the U.S. Constitution ? | | | | | | | | |