A defendant has a constitutional right to be represented by effective counsel. (U.S. Const., 6th & 14th Amends.; Cal. Const., art. I, 15; Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) 372 U.S. 335 [9 L. Ed. 2d 799, 83 S. Ct. 792].) The trial judge has a duty "to protect the defendant's right to a counsel who is effective." ( Smith v. Superior Court (1968) 68 Cal. 2d 547, 559, 68 Cal. Rptr. 1, 440 P.2d 65.) An informed tactical decision made by defense counsel does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. (In re Ibarra (1983) 34 Cal. 3d 277, 284, 193 Cal. Rptr. 538, 666 P.2d 980.) As a corollary rule, "ineptitude or lack of industry" on the part of counsel falls well short of the mark. (In re Saunders (1970) 2 Cal. 3d 1033, 1042, fn. 7, 88 Cal. Rptr. 633, 472 P.2d 921.) "'While acknowledging the wide latitude and discretion necessarily vested in trial counsel in the area of tactics and strategy, we stress that the exercise of that discretion must be a reasonable and informed one in the light of the facts and options reasonably apparent to counsel at the time of trial, and founded upon reasonable investigation and preparation." ( In re Hall (1981) 30 Cal. 3d 408, 426, 179 Cal. Rptr. 223, 637 P.2d 690.)