Opinion ID: 1640733
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: whether the cumulative effect of counsel's performance at the trial and appellate levels was ineffective.

Text: ¶ 80. In considering these two issues together, we are mindful of what we stated in Byrom v. State, 863 So.2d 836 (Miss. 2003): [U]pon appellate review of cases in which we find harmless error or any error which is not specifically found to be reversible in and of itself, we shall have the discretion to determine, on a case-by-case basis, as to whether such error or errors, although not reversible when standing alone, may when considered cumulatively require reversal because of the resulting cumulative prejudicial effect. That having been said, for the reasons herein stated, we find that errors as may appear in the record before us in today's case, are individually harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and when taken cumulatively, the effect of all errors committed during the trial did not deprive Michelle Byrom of a fundamentally fair and impartial trial. Id. at 847. ¶ 81. Applying the Byrom criteria, we find no indications of ineffective assistance of counsel outside the Court's specific findings of possible ineffective assistance of counsel, and we thus find no cumulative error.