Whether Mr. Lewis's state court appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to present obvious and significant constitutional challenges to the admission of evidence on direct appeal

At trial, Mr. Lewis argued that certain key evidence should be suppressed because it was obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The trial court conceded that the Fourth Amendment question was “provocative” but denied the suppression motion. On appeal of his conviction s and sentence , Mr. Lewis’s appellate counsel failed to raise the Fourth Amendment argument, and his conviction was affirmed. The question presented is whether Mr. Lewis’s state court appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to present on direct appeal obvious and significant constitutional challenges to the admission of evidence, when the arguments were clearly preserved at trial .