What is the test for ineffective assistance in a criminal case?

"When examining an ineffective assistance claim, a reviewing court defers to counsel's reasonable tactical decisions, and there is a presumption counsel acted within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance. It is particularly difficult to prevail on an appellate claim of ineffective assistance. On direct appeal, a conviction will be reversed for ineffective assistance only if (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. All other claims of ineffective assistance are more appropriately resolved in a habeas corpus proceeding. [Citations.]" (People v. Mai, supra, 57 Cal.4th at p. 1009.)

Defendant cannot show that there could be no satisfactory explanation for his counsel's failure to object. He claims that the gang expert's testimony violated the federal confrontation clause as construed in Crawford v. Washington (2004) 541 U.S. 36. That is possible only if the gang expert recounted testimonial hearsay. (Id. at pp. 51-53,

Page 13