Does Strickland-v-Washington allow the Court-of-Appeals to dismiss the defendant's ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim based on strong-evidence of his guilt, while failing to consider the effect of counsel's omission on the application of the jury's consideration of the lesser-included-offenses charged in the jury-instructions?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Does Strickland v. Washington allow the Court of Appeals to dismiss the defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim based on “strong evidence” of his guilt, while failing to consider the effect of counsel’s omission on the application of the jury’s consideration of the lesser included offenses charged in the jury instructions? 2. Did the Court of Appeals violate the principles/essence of Brady v. Maryland, in finding no record support that prosecutors bartered with the state’s key witness by providing him time alone with his girlfriend at the prosecutors’ office, where 1. Knowledge of the encounter only came to light during the testimony of an investigating officer, asserting that the girlfriend was in fact brought to the prosecutors office; 2. The witness testified to the sexual encounter that ensued; 3. The defendant was precluded from accessing further evidence establishing the encounter, while simultaneously being held liable for failing to produce evidentiary support of his claim? 3. Is the Third Circuit Court of Appeal’s reliance on State v. Claxton misplaced when the State’s record shows, by voir dire transcripts, that jurors 11 and 14 had indeed discussed their incident of improper communication with other jurors, in direct conflict with the Court’s analysis?