QUESTON NUMBER ONE:
Petitioner Lewis' ex-lawyer provided him with ineffective assistance of counsel by a Motion to Quash and Suppress and failing to conduct adequate pre-trial investigations in regard to Illinois State Trooper Sweeney Racial Profiling in light of selective enforcement of the law him in violation of his Fourth and Fifth Amendment Rights, thus, did his ex-lawyer violate his Sixth Amendment Rights of the U.S. Constitution ?

QUESTION NUMBER TWO:
Whether Petitioner Lewis' ex-lawyer provided him with ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to conduct pre-trial investigations and retain an Expert Witness, thus, did his ex-counsel violate his Sixth Amendment Rights of the U.S. Constitution ?

QUESTION NUMBER THREE:
Whether Petitioner Lewis' ex-lawyer provided him with ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to file a Motion to Suppress Evidence due to Racial Profiling based upon selective enforcement of the law, thus, did his ex-attorney violate his Sixth Amendment Rights of the U.S. Constitution ?

QUESTION NUMBER FOUR:
Petitioner Lewis, states that did his ex-lawyer provide him with ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to object to his statutory enhancement under Section 841 (b) (1) (B); failing to object to his erroneous Career Offender Designation; and failing to object to the PSR sole reliance upon non-Shepard approved documents, thus, did his ex-counsel violate his Sixth Amendment Rights during the sentencing phase ?

Question Number Five;
Petitioner Lewis, asserts that did his ex-appellate attorney provide him with ineffective assistance of counsel by omitting several non-frivolous claims during his direct appeal proceedings, thus, did this violate his Sixth Amendment Rights of the U.S. Constitution ?

Ineffective-assistance-of-counsel