People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708 (1998), the Court found that "effective assistance" varies depending upon the circumstances of the case and that a flexible standard to analyze ineffective assistance of counsel claims must be applied under the New York State Constitution. Specifically, the Benevento Court addressed the term "meaningful representation" and how it is defined. Meaningful representation does not mean a perfect trial and efforts of counsel should not be second-guessed with hindsight. (See Benevento, supra at 712.) Thus, "a reviewing court must avoid confusing true ineffectiveness with mere losing tactics and according undue significance to retrospective analysis." (See Benevento, supra at 712.) The Court of Appeals opined the standard for ineffective assistance of counsel: "The core of the inquiry is whether defendant received meaningful representation . . . the test being reasonable competence, not perfect representation. . . . It is incumbent on defendant to demonstrate the absence of strategic or other legitimate explanations for counsel's alleged shortcomings. . . . Counsel's performance should be objectively evaluated . . . to determine whether it was consistent with strategic decisions of a reasonably competent attorney. . . . As long as the defense reflects a reasonable and legitimate strategy under the circumstances and evidence presented, even if unsuccessful, it will not fall to the level of ineffective assistance. . . . A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel will be sustained only when it is shown that counsel partook an inexplicably prejudicial course."