Opinion ID: 1787012
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Did the failure of Evans' attorney to object to C-6 amount to ineffective assistance of counsel?

Text: ¶ 14. This Court has stated: To be successful on an ineffective assistance claim, the defendant must meet the two-prong test set forth in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 2064, 80 L.Ed.2d 674, 693 (1984), and adopted by this Court. The Strickland test requires a showing of (1) deficiency of counsel's performance (2) sufficient to constitute prejudice to the defense ... based upon the totality of the circumstances. Ivy v. State, 589 So.2d 1263, 1265 (Miss. 1991) (citations omitted). The defendant must show that there is a reasonable probability that but for his attorney's errors, defendant would have received a different result in the trial court. Moody v. State, 644 So.2d 451, 456 (Miss.1994). ¶ 15. As we have held that jury instruction C-6 was properly given by the trial court, Evans' ineffective assistance of counsel argument is without merit, and accordingly, fails.