What is the test for ineffective assistance of counsel in denying a motion to suppress?

Defendant contends he received ineffective assistance of counsel because defense counsel failed to renew the motion to suppress, resulting in the forfeiture of his right to challenge the denial of the motion on appeal (People v. Lilienthal (1978) 22 Cal.3d 891, 896-897 [under 1538.5, subd. (m), a motion to suppress must be made in the superior court to preserve the claim for review on appeal].) He claims the magistrate erred in denying the motion because the good faith exception applied. Defendant argues the exception does not apply to erroneous information generated by a clerk who is an adjunct to law enforcement. Defendant further contends the search of his residence could not be justified as a proper probation search because Ruiz did not have advance knowledge of a search condition.