Whether ineffective assistance of counsel during direct appeal constitutes a violation of due process rights that warrants federal habeas review

& "The faal JisnsqarJ fa dew &via&>ce of /rre£^Ci|^bl£cpnB' c’ b^+^eeAOe^dMi amd hfc Mr Pe?Ks> rtaH4 o reDfesen^-Von a’fn'idcA.i Coothci or &4«c3-!/e > qssisVnce of (^u.HseL' j)tiffMe toufiseU pla/*n error <?r-P=ci lure 4t> iTxise merHori'ou-S /ssues /nvdv/na^he pre— prejojiVa) den/'al <5±&>anseJ left Air rer^ \vfrha4 eVCed-ii/^ ^SS/sfe-flce. <4 c^grestive Coia^s^/ an +he direct ctf>f>e#J t)U^ -fye sWe zb ar Isj^bctse ^Aeir di'screi/oo Ojwl rafobers^^jp 6)-p per/fof/ous ___L^vlnu a, Pco-s^ lihfarr h&lpless {a any /he 'AEOP^'apffairp b be tyswry by fed era I di$rr/ci ^ahhjdS^r^te4hc bMa-rd <4isre^(?ikz/ -for<A25d we 8,