Is a defendant's claim that his trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective for choosing not to bring a Miranda-based suppression motion?

^4. Because we find defendant's Miranda claim fails on the merits, defendant's corollary claim that his trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective for choosing not to move to suppress defendant's statements necessarily fails. Trial counsel is not ineffective for failing to make unmeritorious objections. (See People v. Lewis (1990) 50 Cal.3d 262, 289 [ineffectiveness claim for failing to bring Miranda-based suppression motion "fails at the outset since we have already found no merit in defendant's contention that his statements to the police were obtained in violation of Miranda"].)

^5. While we are not called upon to assess this theory, it is imaginative. But see People v. Walton (1982) 136 Cal.App.3d 76, 79 (the defendant's "argument is a creative one, and not entirely devoid of sympathetic appeal. The principles of our legal system do not, however, permit its acceptance" and "[do] not justify his vigilante tactics").