Opinion ID: 2044620
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: issues

Text: Defendant's appellant counsel asserts that defendant was inadequately represented at the trial level. He describes numerous examples purporting to show the incompetency of trial counsel; however, he fails to cite any parts of the record which would support his claims. Thus, error, if any, was not preserved. Defendant cannot, by merely alluding to error, encumber this Court with the obligation of searching the record in an attempt to reverse. Walters v. State, (1979) Ind., 394 N.E.2d 154, 156. The defendant's charge of inadequate counsel, in the main, alludes to various tactics that might have been employed but were not. There is no showing or even a claim that the employment of such measures would likely have produced a different result, and we will not speculate therein. On the contrary, we presume that counsel was competent and, absent a showing to the contrary, we presume that measures that were not employed, either were not indicated by the circumstances or, if indicated, were rejected upon due deliberation.