In light of this well-established law, the State concedes that defense counsel's performance was deficient because he did not move for a bifurcated trial. See id.; Vann v. State, 266 Ga.App. 238, 240–241(1), 596 S.E.2d 722 (2004). To prevail on his ineffective assistance claim, however, Fontaine must show not only that counsel's performance was deficient, but also that “the deficiency so prejudiced him that, but for counsel's errors, the outcome of the trial likely would have been different.”
(Citation and punctuation omitted.) Vann v. State, 266 Ga. App. 238, 240 (1) ( 596 SE2d 722) (2004). Here, Brown bases his ineffective assistance claim on his trial counsel's failure to strike a juror for cause and counsel's failure to object to (i) hearsay testimony offered by Watson and the investigating police officer; (ii) opinion testimony offered by the doctor who conducted the rape exam of the victim; and (iii) certain statements made by the prosecutor during closing argument.
(Citation and punctuation omitted.) Vann v. State, 266 Ga. App. 238, 240 (1) ( 596 SE2d 722) (2004). 1. Farris contends that his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to attack the validity of the search warrant used to obtain a sample of his DNA. At the hearing on the motion for new trial, defense counsel confirmed that he reviewed the affidavit that served as the basis for the search warrant, and elected not to challenge the warrant.
Williams v. State, 261 Ga. 640, 641 (2) ( 409 SE2d 649) (1991).Vann v. State, 266 Ga. App. 238, 240 (1) ( 596 SE2d 722) (2004).Whitaker v. State, 276 Ga. App. 226 (1) ( 622 SE2d 916) (2005).
Id. (citation omitted). See also Vann v. State, 266 Ga.App. 238, 240-241 (1) ( 596 SE2d 722) (2004) (trial counsel's performance deficient for failing to move to bifurcate trial of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon). Having found deficient performance by trial counsel, we must now analyze whether there is a reasonable probability that the outcome of the proceedings would have been different.
Vann was retried, and this appeal followed. See Vann v. State, 266 Ga.App. 238, 596 S.E.2d 722 (2004).On appeal from a criminal conviction, the evidence is viewed in a light most favorable to the verdict.