Blalock has not cited any case addressing a constitutional challenge to OCGA § 17-16-4 (a) (3) (A), either on its face or as applied, and given that we have found no authority even suggesting that the statute's constitutionality might be doubted, "trial counsel's failure to raise a novel legal argument does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel." Griffin v. State , 309 Ga. 516, 520 (2), 847 S.E.2d 168 (2020) (citation and punctuation omitted). See also Esprit v. State , 305 Ga. 429, 438 (2) (c), 826 S.E.2d 7 (2019) ("A criminal defense attorney does not perform deficiently when he fails to advance a legal theory that would require an extension of existing precedents and the adoption of an unproven theory of law."
Because there is no clear legal authority on how the unanimous jury rule applies when the predicate offenses of a felony murder count are charged in the alternative and different juries decide the main charge and the predicate offenses, "trial counsel's failure to raise a novel legal argument does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel." Griffin v. State , 309 Ga. 516, 520 (2), 847 S.E.2d 168 (2020) (citation and punctuation omitted). See also Rhoden v. State , 303 Ga. 482, 486 (2) (a), 813 S.E.2d 375 (2018) ("[T]here is no requirement for an attorney to prognosticate future law in order to render effective representation.
Id. at 129-130 (2) (b), 856 S.E.2d 280. See also Griffin v. State, 309 Ga. 516, 520 (2), 847 S.E.2d 168 (2020) (where our courts "have not yet squarely decided" an issue, "trial counsel’s failure to raise a novel legal argument does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.") (citation and punctuation omitted); Rhoden v. State, 303 Ga. 482, 486 (2) (a), 813 S.E.2d 375 (2018) ("[T]here is no requirement for an attorney to prognosticate future law in order to render effective representation.
As such, McMurria cannot demonstrate that trial counsel's failure to object to the bailiff's comments affected the outcome of the trial. See Griffin v. State , 309 Ga. 516, 520 (2), 847 S.E.2d 168 (2020) ("The failure to pursue a futile objection does not amount to ineffective assistance.") (citation and punctuation omitted). Accordingly, McMurria fails to meet his burden to show that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance.
Because existing precedent does not resolve whether "abdomen" is included in the definition of bodily "member," Moss cannot show that trial counsel's failure to file a demurrer claiming that the abdomen is not a bodily "member" amounted to deficient performance. See Griffin v. State , 309 Ga. 516, 520, 847 S.E.2d 168 (2020) (Where "we have not yet squarely decided" an issue, "trial counsel's failure to raise a novel legal argument does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.") (citation and punctuation omitted); Rhoden v. State , 303 Ga. 482, 486, 813 S.E.2d 375 (2018) ("[T]here is no requirement for an attorney to prognosticate future law in order to render effective representation. Counsel is not obligated to argue beyond existing precedent.") (citations and punctuation omitted).