R. v. Trudel, 2015 ONCA 422:
 The analysis of a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel proceeds upon a strong presumption that counsel's assistance was competent: R. v. G.D.B., 2000 SCC 22,  1 S.C.R. 520, at para. 27.
 The onus is on the appellant to rebut this presumption by establishing both that counsel was incompetent and that this incompetent assistance resulted in a miscarriage of justice: R. v. L.C.T., 2012 ONCA 116, 252 C.R.R. (2d) 223, at para. 37.
 Before the court will assess competence, however, the appellant must demonstrate she suffered prejudice: G.D.B., at para. 29. Where the alleged prejudice relates to the reliability of the verdict rather than procedural fairness, like in this case, the accused must demonstrate there is a reasonable possibility that the result would have been different but for the alleged incompetence: R. v.Dunbar, 2007 ONCA 840, at para. 23.
 If the appellant has not met her onus on the issue of prejudice, it is undesirable and unnecessary for the court to consider the performance component of the analysis: G.D.B., at para. 29.