California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Molea, C074443 (Cal. App. 2014):
Defendant claims his trial counsel's cross-examination, which assertedly provided the needed specificity, constituted ineffective assistance. "[A] conviction will not be reversed based on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel unless the defendant establishes both of the following: (1) that counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness; and (2) that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, a determination more favorable to defendant would have resulted. [Citations.] If the defendant makes an insufficient showing on either one of these components, the ineffective assistance claim fails. Moreover, ' "a court need not determine whether counsel's performance was deficient before examining the prejudice suffered by the defendant as a result of the alleged deficiencies." [Citation.]' [Citation.]" (People v. Rodrigues (1994) 8 Cal.4th 1060, 1126 (Rodrigues).)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.