Whether, for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1), a state court adjudication of the prejudice prong of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim is "contrary to" Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), when it requires a defendant to show he actually would have accepted the state's plea offer, rather than only a "reasonable probability" that he would have done so, and therefore a federal habeas court reviews that claim de novo, as the Sixth Circuit has held; or whether that state-court adjudication is reviewed only for reasonableness, as the Eleventh Circuit held below.

Whether a state court adjudication of the prejudice prong of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim is 'contrary to' Strickland v. Washington