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?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Does Lockhart v. Fretwell, 506 U.S. 364, 113 S. Ct. 838, 122 L. Ed. 2d 180 (1998), 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.