What is the test for a claim of ineffective assistance on appeal?

of reasonableness under prevailing norms" and (2) there was "resulting prejudice, i.e., a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's deficient performance, the outcome of the proceeding would have been different." (People v. Mai (2013) 57 Cal.4th 986, 1009.)

In evaluating such a claim, we "defer[] to counsel's reasonable tactical decisions, and there is a presumption counsel acted within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance." (People v. Mai, supra, 57 Cal.4th at p. 1009.) Because the presumption of counsel's competence typically can be rebutted only with evidence outside the record, claims of ineffective assistance made on direct appeal fail unless "(1) the record affirmatively discloses counsel had no rational tactical purpose for the challenged act or omission, (2) counsel was asked for a reason and failed to provide one, or (3) there simply could be no satisfactory explanation." (Ibid.)