What is the test for a motion to suppress and exclude evidence?

The People are correct that on appeal, the pretrial evidentiary motions to suppress and exclude evidence "must be reviewed on the record as it existed when the court decided the motion." (People v. Torres (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 775, 780; see, e.g., People v. Hernandez (2008) 45 Cal.4th 295, 301.) However, defendant contends that this court may review the entirety of the record based on his additional appellate argument that defense counsel was prejudicially ineffective for failing to introduce certain relevant evidence at both pretrial hearings, and counsel's failure to introduce the evidence was prejudicial because such evidence would have compelled the court to suppress the contraband and exclude his confession.

"To establish ineffective assistance, defendant bears the burden of showing, first, that counsel's performance was deficient, falling below an objective standard of reasonableness under prevailing professional norms. Second, a defendant must establish that, absent counsel's error, it is reasonably probable that the verdict would have been more favorable to him. [Citations.]" (People v. Hawkins (1995) 10 Cal.4th 920, 940, overruled on other grounds in People v. Lasko (2000) 23 Cal.4th 101, 110 and People v. Blakeley (2000) 23 Cal.4th 82, 89.)