What is the test for ineffective assistance of counsel?

Finally, appellant's ineffective assistance of counsel claim based on his trial counsel's failure to object to the amount of time given to her for closing argument, and failure to argue for more time, fails. In light of the court's strong admonitions to counsel regarding the pace of the trial, any objections by appellant's trial counsel would have been overruled by the trial court. Furthermore, a review of the defense closing argument indicates counsel addressed the jury instructions, the elements of the offenses, Deputy Huerta's testimony, and mental illness. There is no reason to believe any longer argument would have done anything to change the jury's verdicts. Appellant has failed to show a reasonable probability that, but for trial counsel's lack of objection or request for more time, appellant would have obtained a more favorable result. (People v. Blankenship (1959) 171 Cal.App.2d 66, 82.)

Page 28

V. Substantial Evidence Supports Appellant's Convictions on Counts 1, 3, and 4

Appellant contends the evidence was insufficient to sustain the convictions. We disagree.