Does Counsel's failure to object to evidence of a hypodermic needle and vial evidence constitute ineffective assistance of counsel?

Although the needle/vial evidence does not appear to be directly relevant to any issue in dispute, counsel's failure to object did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. The "decision to object or not object to the admission of evidence is inherently tactical, and a failure to object will seldom establish ineffective assistance." (People v. Beasley (2003) 105 Cal.App.4th 1078, 1092.) Counsel could have made the decision not to object to avoid highlighting the testimony as an objection could have drawn more attention to the needles. By not objecting, the officer was permitted to continue his testimony, the reference to the hypodermic needles was minimized, and neither counsel nor any witness again referred to the evidence.