Whether the lower courts applied an erroneous standard for determining prejudice under Strickland v. Washington when assessing the impact of trial counsel's failure to challenge forensic blood pattern evidence

Question(s) Presented 1. If Velma and the rest of the Scooby Doo Mystery Inc. Gang would expose junk science presented to the jury in order to preserve the reliability and credibility of forensic science in court rooms; and would determine trial counsel to be ineffective for failing to do the same; then did the lower courts employ an erroneous standard for determining prejudice under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 690-691 (U.S. 1984) when they determined that Dominick’s blood pattern expert used for rebuttal must exonerate Dominick to a mathematical degree of certainty in order to demonstrate that Dominick’s defense was impaired by trial counsel’s failure to present a blood pattern expert who on appeal testified that the Commonwealth’s blood pattern evidence was neither forensically accurate, nor reliable. iii