Does the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution still guarantee a criminal defendant the right to effective assistance of counsel, to protect the fundamental right to a fair trial?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED L. MK. WHETSON, CawreWos TUAT GE RECEIVES ENEFLECTZVE ASSISTANCE OF Couns€ DUuRZWG UYFZS TREAC [PROCEEDING ZH WHICH DEPRIVED HEM OF HLS SLKTH Am EVOMENT KLIGHT OF THE UNETEO S7NTES Con STETUTHOM; | Q. Does THE SZATH AmenomenT OF THE UNETER STATES CowsTLruTeod STZK /(ovame A Ueiingnac DEFENOANT WETH THE RIGHT Zo EFFECTIVE ASSZSTANCLE OF ChUWSEL, TO PROTECT THE EUNDAMENTAL LKLRUT 8 A Frrae TREE ? ZZ. Me. luz7son, Cow TEeO> THAT HES TREAC COUNSEL WADE : . Con CESSHOVS THROUGH T 42S TRZAC THAT AmMounTEe? Zo Ad Admreszod OF Guzcz7, Tint Lelzeveo Him of Hzs SZx7id AMEVOWEDST KILGNT Fo AESTSTANCE Of COUUEEL AT TRPRL, Q. Dees A TRZAC COUNSEL HAVE THE ALUTHOETY To [WHILE CONCEESHENS THCouGHouT HLS CLIENTS TRIM REG RLOFNG Co HES GuZCT, WHEN HES CULENT MAICES FT JOU en) THAT (LES OBTEEFNE OF . Ags DELENSE LS To mae iAEW HEE LVN OCENCE OF THE CHARGED CRLMEWAL KCTS AN PuKsuE Aa) ACQUETIAC? TL. Me, wizreow, Coweuns THAT HES Haees ACT Rocoeeey Cork Wee T=aeS VL0laTEO THE Ex Post Fucro Cususe of THE UWZTEO STNTES Cons727UT Zap) Arlo THe Frrry AmelDmenT > DUE PRICESS CRUSE, OLCMUSE THE SIXTH CZROULT CoueT ok AyleRts jeecteo on) THE UNTTEO STATES SUPREME CoukT > DECESN Za) Tago. V. UWEFED STATES. | 577 N.S. 301 (2o/¢), A CASE Deazrbeo AFTER He loAS ACLEGED Fo HAVE Commz77E0 HES OFFENSES 72 AfEERM HFS CON VE CTZeNS ON DZRECT APPEAL: Q. Does A NEw RUG OF Law TuAt LS Appeeo 70 A DeFevoan7's CASE 75 Decez0E Hs DFKAT APPEAL, WHZCH ReGueees La LESSER QuaNnTum OF EVZOENLE 70 CONVERT THE DEFENOAT THAN WAS REQUERED IT THE TEME THAT THE Ple7ve7 rR S CREME Ws ALLEGED Ze Yave BER CommzTIEO VZOLITE ; Tle €x Post Kacrd CLAUSE OF THE UNETEO STHTES ConSTETUTAU LV. MR WHF {50nN, CONTENOS THAT THE GOVERN MENT WETHHED AGRED Upon) BeKoy ) SENCKS, AO GIGILO NATE IAL, FALSTFLED SEARCH Wie RanT AF FZONET PVO WARRANTS, KIRESEVTED FMSE EVZDENCE on 0 PERTAREO Teszzimony C berg) Ro BABE CAUSE LEnDHl (0 HE TeceGac AKRLST AO SCHRCH OF [Ni2, WIHZTSON'S RESIDENCE. Q. Does THE COMSTETUTZEN PERNET THE PROSECUT Zon) TO COMMIT PROSECU TORLAL NLS COMOUNT S0 EGREGZ0US IS % Deny A CRimzvAl DEFENOANT HIS CONSTETUT Ze. | RIGHTS RvO A FUniDAMEN TALLY FALR. TRL AC, WHEW THE EVIDENCE ZS Creme OF THES FACTT /