DOES THE ANTITERRORISM AND EFFECTIVE DEATH PENALTY ACT OF 1996 (AEDPA) REQUIRE THE PRESUMPTION OF CORRECTNESS TO BE APPLIED TO THE STATE COURT'S FINDING OF FACT WHEN THE PETITIONER IS CHALLENGING THAT FACT, UNDER 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254(d)(2) [THAT] RESULTED IN A DECISION THAT WAS BASED ON AN UNREASONABLE DETERMINATION OF THE FACTS IN LIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED IN THE STATE COURT PROCEEDING BEFORE JUDICIAL REVIEW?

IF, A PETITIONER OVERCOMES THE UNREASONABLE DETERMINATION OF THE FACTS IN LIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED IN THE STATE COURT PROCEEDING IS HE OR SHE STILL REQUIRED TO OVERCOME THE PRESUMPTION OF CORRECTNESS UNDER 28 U.S.C.A. 2254 (e)(1); "THE APPLICANT SHALL HAVE THE BURDEN OF REBUTTING THE PRESUMPTION OF CORRECTNESS BY CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE."

Does the AEDPA require the presumption of correctness to be applied to the state court's finding of fact when the petitioner is challenging that fact, under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254(d)(2)