Louis John Fontanez v. United States

Was counsel constitutionally ineffective because he failed to consult or hire expert witnesses to investigate tte but-for causation of the victim's injury in a case where the petitioner faced the "death or serious bodily injury results" penalty enhancement under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(C)? Did the lower courts: commit reversible error by using the performance of the co-defenchnt's counsel to deny the petitioner's §2255 claim of ineffective assistance of counsel? Did the lower courtU commit reversible error when they denied the Petitioner's §2255 motion based ujjon the probable guilty verdict at trial rather than the liklihood that the petitioner would Have pleaded guilty in a case involving a guilty jjlea? Was the {petitioner's guilty plea sustained in violation of due process warranting habeas relief where the district court repeatedly denied the petitioner's motions for the discovery needed to meet the circuit's threshold to show prejudice in a § 2255 'failure to hire expert si'1 claim? Or alternatively, is the Eighth Circuit's requirement that a prisoner Hire their own expert to present testimony to support a rfailure to hire experts' §2255 ineffective assistance of counsel claim so burdensome tHat it resulted in tidelower courty sustaining the petitioner's guilty pLea in violation of due process warranting habeas relief? Did the courts below commit reversible error by denying petitioner's §2255 ineffective assistance of counsel claims without conducting an evidentiary hearing? Did the lower courts commit reversible error by denying a Certificate of Appealability regarding the petitioner's § 2255 ineffective assistance of counsel claims? -i-