necessary to the success of a Sixth Amendment claim like [Palaciosjs, a good Fourth Amendment claim alone will not earn a prisoner habeas relief. Only those habeas petitions who can prove under Strickland that they have been denied a fair trial by the gross incompetence of their attorneys will be granted the writ and will be entitled to retrial without the challenged evidence, id. at 382, 106 S.Ct. 2574. “[I]n light of Strickland ..., a Sixth Amendment ineffective assistance of counsel claim necessarily invokes federal law that has been ‘clearly established’ by the Supreme Court within the meaning of AEDPA.” Mosby v. Senkowski, 470 F.3d 515, 518-19 (2d Cir.2006) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 390-91, 120 S.Ct. 1495, 146 L.Ed.2d 389 (2000) (<HOLDING>). Strickland requires that a “criminal
holding petitioner has the burden of proof under the strickland test holding that clearly established federal law as determined by the supreme court under aedpa is the law at the time of the statecourt adjudication on the merits not at the time the conviction becomes final holding that old rules under teague constitute clearly established federal law under aedpa holding that second element of qualified immunity test is whether the law violated was clearly established recognizing the test set forth in strickland as clearly established law for aedpa purposes