Whether appellate counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to challenge the admission of discriminatory gang membership evidence through a state witness without foundation or personal knowledge

I WAS IT INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF ecu NSCLQF APPELLATE COUNSELS FAlLUP-ETO ARetlETHAT TRIAL COUNSEL WA5 INEFFECTIVE FOR. FAIUNEiTD AF6UE THE ADMISSION OF DISCFl MIAJATORV EVIDENCE OF DEFENDANTS AU£6ED &AN6 MEMBERSHIP OB ASSOCIATION vlA TESTII^ON)/OF STATES WITNESS, JOE AMERUNa WITHOUTANV FOUNDATION OR PERSONAL RNPWLED6F?FALSE