This case arises from a habeas petition brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 alleging ineffective assistance of counsel in violation of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. This petition presents the following questions for review:

1. Does Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) require a court to evaluate the cumulative effect of the errors of counsel in determining whether prejudice is shown?

2. Does a federal court owe AEDPA deference to findings from a state post-conviction court that a habeas petitioner received deficient performance?

3. In an ineffective assistance of counsel claim predicated on the failure to preserve a cause objection to a juror, does a petitioner have to show that the seated juror is "actually biased" to obtain relief?

4. Does a habeas petitioner make "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right," 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), as required for the issuance of a certificate of appealability, where he shows the state post-conviction court applied the wrong standard for prejudice under Strickland and identifies multiple errors that undermine the reliability of the result at trial?

Does Strickland require cumulative-effect-of-errors evaluation,does-AEDPA-deference-apply-to-state-court-findings-favorable-to-petitioner,does-actual-bias-of-juror-need-to-be-shown,does-showing-of-wrong-prejudice-standard-merit-COA