Whether reviewing courts must consider the cumulative effect of counsel's errors in determining Strickland prejudice and weigh Van Arsdall factors for ineffective assistance of counsel claims

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether this Court's holding in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), requires reviewing courts to consider the cumilative effect of counsel's errors in determining : prejudice. 2. Whether Petitioner was entitled to a certificate of appeal: ability (COA) on his Strickland claims where the district ; court refused to consider the cumulative effect of counsel's errors in determining prejudice and there is a sircuit split on that specific issue. ; ; 3. Whether reviewing courts are required to weigh the factors 2. set forth in Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 686-87 (1986), to determine Strickland prejudice, where an attorney elicits and fails to object to inadmissible hearsay testimony and that testimony is the only evidence that sufficiently corroborates the accomplice witness testimony. ; 4. Whether Petitioner was entitled to a COA on his Strickland claims where the district court did not weigh the Van Arsdall factors in determining prejudice for counsel's eliciting of and failure to object to the above mentioned hearsay testimony and at least one other circuit uses the : Van Arsdall factors in this same type of situation. ii