Shimel v. Warren

Whether it is a reasonable application of clearly established federal law to require a habeas petitioner, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel in connection with a guilty plea, to demonstrate under the "prejudice" prong of Strickland v. Washington that but for counsel's ostensible deficient performance: (1) the petitioner, or a rational person in the petitioner's position, would have pled not guilty and received a favorable outcome at trial, as required by the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 6th and 9th Circuits; rather than (2) the petitioner, or a rational person in the petitioner's position, would simply have pled not guilty, as required by the U.S. Courts of Appeals for 3rd, 4th, 7th, and 10th Circuits.