Were petitioner's rights under the Fourth and Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution violated by trial counsel's failure to challenge the validity of a search warrant obtained via the intentional or reckless omission of a material fact, that was known to the affiant at the time, and would have invalidated the statements of probable cause made in the affidavit supporting the warrant?

Is it not the trial court judge's duty under the United States Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause to require the prosecution to prove every element of the offense being tried, and to give the jury a required instruction, sua sponte, concerning the meaning of a material element necessary to convict?

Should a convicted indigent person forever have to suffer the adverse penalties caused by his or her state-appointed trial counsel's failure during trial, and his or her appellate counsel's failure to raise meritorious paramount issues during that person's first appeal as of right; and due to the failures of counsel, should that convicted person be barred from raising the omitted issues via a postconviction relief proceeding? (Such as a petition for writ of habeas corpus.)

Were petitioner's rights under the Fourth and Sixth Amendments violated by trial counsel's failure to challenge a search warrant obtained via intentional or reckless omission of a material fact?