Opinion ID: 1903282
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Whether the Defendant's trial counsel was ineffective?

Text: ¶ 20. Ineffective assistance of counsel is analyzed under the two-prong test of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984): a defendant must show (1) specific acts or omissions on the part of trial counsel indicating deficient performance, and (2) the deficient performance resulted in prejudice to the defendant. There is a strong presumption that the performance of counsel was adequate, and a reviewing court may look to the totality of the circumstances in determining whether a defendant was deprived of effective assistance of counsel. Waldrop v. State, 506 So.2d 273, 276 (Miss.1987). To overcome this presumption, `[t]he defendant must show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.' Payton v. State, 708 So.2d 559, 560-61 (Miss.1998) ( quoting Strickland, 466 U.S. at 694, 104 S.Ct. 2052). ¶ 21. In the instant case, Gilley alleges several acts or omissions on the part of counsel: