I. WHETHER PETITIONER RECEIVED THE EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION OF TRIAL COUNSEL WHEN COUNSEL FAILED TO PROPERLY INVESTIGATE THE CASE AND THE SIXTH CIRCUIT COURT VIOLATED PETITIONER'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND THE U.S. SUPREME COURT'S HOLDING OF STRICKLAND V WASHINGTON, BY APPLYING THE WRONG STANDARD TO DETERMINE PREJUDICE AND IGNORING PETITIONER'S REQUEST FOR AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING?

II. WHETHER THE SENTENCE IMPOSED BY THE DISTRICT COURT WAS PROCEDURALLY UNREASONABLE AS THE DRUG QUANTITIES AND FRAUD AMOUNTS USED TO CALCULATE THE ADVISORY GUIDELINE RANGE ARE NOT SUPPORTED BY THE EVIDENCE NOR REASONABLY FORESEEABLE TO DR. PAMATMAT?

whether-petitioner-received-effective-assistance-of-counsel