Is there any case law where defense counsel was deficient in declining to cross-examine witnesses 188 and 194 regarding a recorded conversation?

Here, we cannot conclude that defense counsel was deficient in declining to cross-examine witnesses 188 and 194 regarding the recorded jail conversation. Defense counsel reviewed the recording to determine whether it could be used to cross-examine witnesses 188 and 194, and he determined that the recording would not provide an "effective" means of cross-examination as "a tactical matter." Defense counsel's conclusion was reasonable. It is undisputed that the audio portion of the recording was "very difficult to discern," "fragmentary," and lacked "complete conversations." Given that the recording did not capture any intelligible conversation, defense counsel rationally concluded that the recording did not support the defense theory that witnesses 188 and 194 colluded to fabricate a story. Defense counsel therefore did not render ineffective assistance in failing to cross-examine witnesses 188 and 194 regarding the recorded jail conversation. (See generally People v. Jones (2003) 29 Cal.4th 1229, 1254 [a reviewing court will defer to counsel's reasonable tactical decisions].)