For the reasons that we discussed with counsel at oral argument, we are convinced that no part of the petitioner’s ineffective assistance claim is unexhausted or proeedurally barred, and the district court did not err in finding that the state court’s determination regarding the prejudice prong was an unreasonable application of the principles set out in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

AFFIRMED.