Whether the presumption of reasonable trial strategy that this Court articulated in Strickland created an irrebuttable bar to performance competency challenges in the ineffective assistance of counsel context? If the answer to that question is no, then the presumption of competence in assessing counsel's trial tactics must be overcome when the record demonstrates that counsel's strategy was predicated upon a misunderstanding of the law surrounding the defendant's case.

Whether the presumption of reasonable trial strategy in Strickland creates an irrebuttable bar to performance competency challenges in ineffective assistance of counsel cases?