assistance of counsel.”. 4. Op. at 1036, last two lines of Section III.B. 1: Delete “we do not base our finding of incompetence entirely on this claim.” and replace with “we do not base our finding of ineffectiveness entirely on this claim.”. 5. Op. at 1036, second paragraph of section III.B.2: Delete Counsel’s unreasonable failure to investigate and present the factual and legal basis of Lin’s asylum claim would itself place her actions outside of the range of competent assistance of counsel under Strickland. Before exercising reasonable professional judgment over what facts and legal theories to advance to the IJ, she had to investigate Lin’s case sufficiently to learn what those facts were. See Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510, 123 S.Ct. 2527, 2538-39, 156 L.Ed.2d 471 (2003) (<HOLDING>) (citing Strickland, 466 U.S. at 690-91, 104
holding that unreasonable noise is not vague because unreasonable denotes objectivity based on circumstances holding that alleged choice not to present a conceivable defense when following an unreasonable investigation that failed to discover basis for that defense is itself unreasonable holding that a laches defense must be premised on an unreasonable delay that has somehow prejudiced the party asserting the defense holding that a party failed to present any evidence to rebut inference that delay was unreasonable and inexcusable holding that even if a defendant shows that particular errors of counsel were unreasonable he must show that they actually had an adverse effect on the defense and not merely that the errors had some conceivable effect on the outcome of the proceeding