Is there any case law where a defendant's trial counsel failed to argue that mention of the death penalty prior to his second confession was coercive?

Defendant insists that any failure by trial counsel to adequately preserve his current challenge to the second confession amounts to ineffective assistance in violation of his right to counsel under both the federal and state Constitutions. We disagree. So far as the record on appeal discloses and for reasons we explain, mention of the death penalty prior to the second confession was not coercive, and the suppression motion could not properly have been granted on this ground. We therefore cannot conclude that trial counsel was incompetent in failing to raise the issue. (See, e.g., People v. Lucas (1995) 12 Cal.4th 415, 441-442, 48 Cal.Rptr.2d 525, 907 P.2d 373 [rejecting incompetence claim based on trial counsel's failure to argue that interrogating officers threatened defendant with the death penalty].)