I. Ohio has a two step procedure under Ohio App R 26 when one claims the ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. First, there must be a timely "application" to the Court of Appeals. If there is a "genuine issue" of counsel's ineffectiveness, the case is then reopened by the Court and there is additional briefing "on the merits" and a decision by the Court. Does the denial of an "application" alone constitute a decision "on the merits" that warrants AEDPA deference?

II. When there is testimony in favor of a complete defense that one was defending his mother from a physical attack yet counsel fails to request the standard jury instruction in support of that complete defense, is counsel ineffective under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the federal Constitution?

Does the denial of an 'application' alone constitute a decision 'on the merits' that warrants AEDPA deference?