When a defendant asserts IAC on direct appeal in Ohio for failing to object to inadmissible evidence and is able to demonstrate deficient performance, does the Sixth Amendment require the State to meet the same burden to refute prejudice that would apply in the case of preserved error?

QUESTION PRESENTED . When trial counsel objects to the erroneous admission of character evidence and preserves the evidentiary error, the prosecution in Ohio has the burden on direct appeal to show that the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. ; Morris, 141 Ohio St.3d 399, 2014-Ohio-5052, 24 N.E.38d 1153. Ohio also permits defendants to raise claims of ineffective assistance of counsel (“IAC”) on direct appeal, including claims based on the failure to object to inadmissible evidence. So the question presented is: When a defendant asserts IAC on direct appeal in Ohio for failing to object to inadmissible evidence and is able to demonstrate deficient . performance, does the Sixth Amendment require the State to meet the same burden to refute prejudice that would apply in the case of preserved error? ili RELATED CASES The Supreme Court of Ohio: : State v. Alexander, 173 Ohio St.3d 1404, 2024-Ohio-555, 227 N.E.3d 1265 (Feb. 20, 2024), reconsideration denied on Apr. 30, 2024, 173 Ohio St.3d 1478, 2024-Ohio-1577, 232 N.E.3d 829. : The Ohio Sixth District Court of Appeals: State v. Alexander, 2023-Ohio-2708, 222 N.E.3d 812 (6th Dist. Aug. 4, 2023), reconsideration denied on Oct. 27, 2028. : The Common Pleas Court of Lucas County, Ohio: State v. Alexander, Lucas C.P. No. CR-0202101678 (June 10, 2022). iv ;