Can a defense counsel not request a limiting instruction concerning a prior murder conviction not ineffective assistance?

Since defendant was claiming that he had acted in self-defense or heat of passion, defense counsel could have reasonably made the tactical choice not to request a limiting instruction because he did not want to draw further attention to defendant's methamphetamine use. (See People v. Hinton (2006) 37 Cal.4th 839, 878 [failure to request a limiting instruction concerning prior murder conviction not ineffective assistance because "counsel may have deemed it unwise to call further attention to it."]) In addition, an instruction pursuant to CALCRIM No. 375 would have explicitly told the jury that, if it found defendant had committed those uncharged acts, it could consider the

Page 22