Does Lockhart v. Fretwell, 506 U.S. 364, 113 S. Ct. 838, 122 L. Ed. 2d 180
(1993), prevent federal habeas corpus relief regardless of substantive prejudice,
when the United States Supreme Court precedent that existed at the time of trial
was not clearly inconsistent with the subsequent state court decision and prejudice
is apparent?

Did the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeal fail to assess the effect of the
incomplete jury instruction as a result of application of Lockhart v. Fretwell based
upon misapplication of Knight v. State, 286 So 3d 147 (Fla. 2019) The intervening
state law is not applicable to Guzman and therefore Fretwell does not apply. A
reasonable state appellate court would have reversed for new trial based on the
incomplete instruction, both then and now, had appellate counsel presented the
point on appeal.

Absence of jury instruction deprived jury of fair consideration of Petitioner 's
defense on offense of conviction and absence of point on appeal resulted in
fundamentally unfair appellate proceeding.

Does Lockhart v. Fretwell prevent federal habeas corpus relief despite prejudice when Supreme Court precedent at trial was not clearly inconsistent with subsequent state court decision?