1. In applying Harrington Vs. Richter, 562 U.S. 86((2011), on the state's unreasonable application of Constitutional effective assistance of counsel in violation of 28 federal courts undermine the state courts' rulingsto a habeas corpus standard for U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1), can the Constitutional guaranteed rights to the Petitioner to find ea: - reasonable applications of controlling precedent.claim based are

2. In applying Harrington Vs. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (2011) ciain based on the state's unreasonable application of Constitutional effective assistance of counsel in'violation of 28. to a habeas corpus standard for U.S.C. §.2254(d) (2), can"the federal courts affirm a possible "tactical choresV, .'.trial counsel made-on the basis of facts which are known to be false and misleading pursuant to 28 U. underminded by clear and convincing evidence in theS.C. § 2254(d)(1), state court record.

Whether federal courts can undermine constitutional rights by finding state court rulings reasonable under Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (2011) in habeas corpus claims based on ineffective assistance of counsel under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1)