People v. Holt CA3

DISCUSSION

I Trial Counsel Was Not Ineffective For Failing To Object To Officer Toy’s Testimony Because Toy Was Not Offering An Opinion On Defendant’s Guilt Defendant contends his trial counsel was ineffective in violation of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel for failing to object to Officer Toy’s testimony that he “believe[d] that [defendant] had control and custody of th[e] backpack” that was found in the southeast bedroom. Defendant argues his trial counsel should have objected to this testimony because it was “improper opinion testimony” that “was tantamount to an opinion that [defendant] was guilty of knowingly possessing the revolver and ammunition inside the backpack as well as possession of the rifle found inside the bedroom closet.” Trial counsel’s performance was not deficient because Officer Toy’s testimony was not an opinion about defendant’s guilt, but rather, provided the reason why defendant was arrested. (See Strickland v. Washington (1984) 466 U.S. 668, 687 [80 L.Ed.2d 674, 693] [deficient performance is the first prong of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim].) This interpretation of the record is supported by the trial transcript that reads as follows:…