Does a failure to object to a prosecutor's summation constitute ineffective assistance?

Our dissenting colleague argues that defense counsel was effective and that we have wrongly concluded that a single failure to object constitutes ineffective assistance (dissenting op. at 785, 792793, 16 N.Y.S.3d at 49697, 50102, 37 N.E.3d at 113839, 114344). That is incorrect and oversimplifies our analysis. We do not base our decision on defense counsel's failure to object to an isolated, insignificant, albeit erroneous, statement by the prosecutor. As our discussion makes clear, the prosecution's summation contains numerous misrepresentations of the evidence. The apparent intent was to persuade the jury that the DNA established that defendant had committed the rape and murder, when the evidence did not, and could not, dispositively establish his guilt. The record also makes clear that defense counsel failed to object throughout the summation, thus presenting multiple failures, different in kind from that identified in People v. Turner, 5 N.Y.3d 476, 806 N.Y.S.2d 154, 840 N.E.2d 123 (2005). Given the prosecutorial misrepresentations that define the summation in this case, we disagree with our dissenting colleague that counsel's inactions are the equivalent of an excusable single error.