Ineffective assistance of counsel; Failure to object to the admission of a portion of the arresting police officer’s body cam video; Prejudice; MRE 403; Res gestae; Failure to dismiss a potentially impartial juror; Waiver of closing argument; Shackling

The court held that although defense counsel was deficient for failing to object to the admission of a portion of the arresting police officer’s body cam video, defendant did not show that he was prejudiced by the error. Also, his other claims of ineffective assistance lacked merit. Finally, the court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion and violate his due-process rights by requiring him to be shackled during the trial. He was convicted of domestic violence, third offense. Defendant argued that counsel failed “to object to the presentation of the final portion of the video which was unfairly prejudicial and should have been excluded from evidence, and that the outcome of his trial was prejudiced by the inclusion of this evidence.” Although the court held that “counsel’s failure to object to the admission of the video fell below an objective standard of reasonableness under prevailing professional norms, defendant was not prejudiced by counsel’s performance in light of the other evidence proving the domestic assault charge.” Affirmed.