Does a defendant have grounds for reversal of a finding of ineffective assistance of counsel?

Defendant also urges reversal based on purported prosecutorial misconduct. He made no objection to the challenged conduct in the trial court, and thus has waived any asserted errors in this regard. (People v. Brown (2003) 31 Cal.4th 518, 553 ["To preserve a claim of prosecutorial misconduct for appeal, a criminal defendant must make a timely objection, make known the basis of his objection, and ask the trial court to admonish the jury."].) Nevertheless, given his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, we review the challenged conduct.

Defendant first faults the prosecutor for commenting, during closing argument, on defendant's failure to present evidence of false accusations even though the trial court had excluded such evidence. (See People v. Varona (1983) 143 Cal.App.3d 566, 570 ["argu[ing] the 'lack' of evidence where the defense was ready and willing to produce it" goes "beyond the bounds of any acceptable conduct"].) However, when "the prosecutor's argument constituted fair comment on the evidence, following evidentiary rulings we have upheld, there was no misconduct and, contrary to defendant's claim, no miscarriage of justice." (People v. Lawley (2002) 27 Cal.4th 102, 156 [distinguishing Varona].) Because we have upheld the trial court's evidentiary ruling, defendant's claim fails.