Whether the Courts below decided an important federal question in a way that conflicts with the relevant decisions of this court

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Whether the Courts below decided an important federal question in a way that conflicts with the relevant decisions of this court when they denied —without an evidentiary hearing — Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus, which asserted trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object and move for mistrial based on a discovery and/or Brady violation, thus depriving Petitioner of his Sixth Amendment Right to the effective assistance of counsel. A prosecutor has a duty to learn of any favorable evidence known to others acting on the government's behalf in the case, including the police, and failing ; to do so violates a defendant's constitutional due process right. Kyles v. Whifley, 514 U.S. 419, 115 S. Ct. 1555 (1995). Mr. Pierre's prosecutor failed to learn of and a disclose favorable video evidence possessed by the police. Was the reasoning of the State Court contrary to and an unreasonable: application of Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419, 115 S. Ct. 1555 (1995), where it concluded that since the . prosecutor's office did not possess the favorable video evidence, due process ; was not violated? ; il