Christopher Walker was convicted of burglary, criminal trespass, and two armed robberies after an officer found him beside a vehicle that had fled while carrying a television and duffel bag. The trial court granted Walker a new trial, finding that counsel had been ineffective for failing to file a particularized motion to suppress. The State appealed that order. The Court of Appeals reversed. Even assuming that counsel’s decision not to file the motion was deficient, Walker could not show prejudice because the evidence of guilt was overwhelming. The officer’s observations, Walker’s conflicting statements, the robbery broadcast, and a victim’s identification of the television supported the convictions. The court therefore held that the ineffective-assistance claim did not satisfy the requirement of a reasonable probability that the result would have been different. The decision reinstated the trial judgment and illustrates the distinct prejudice inquiry in an ineffective-assistance claim involving a proposed suppression motion.