With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Based on this exchange, Pepe-Frazier contends that his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to object to the trial court’s denial all not be required, nor exces urer, 320 Ga. App. at 592 (6) (b). 22 OCGA § 16-6-4 (c); see also OCGA § 16-6-4 (a) (1) (“Aperson commits the offense of child molestation when such person... [djoes any immoral or indecent act to or in the presence of or with any child under the age of 16 years with the intent to arouse or satisfy the sexual desires of either the child or the person . . . .”). 23 We note that Pepe-Frazier was indicted on a charge of statutory rape related to the allegations of having vaginal intercourse with the victim, hut the jury acquitted him of this charge. 24 See, e.g., Jessie v. State, 294 Ga. 375, 377 (2) (a) (754 SE2d 46) (2014) (<HOLDING>). 25 Cf. Nguyen v. State, 296 Ga. App. 853,

A: holding that the decision to pursue an all or nothing strategy was not patently unreasonable and accordingly that counsel was not ineffective in his strategic decision not to request a jury charge as to the lesserincluded offense
B: holding that counsel was not ineffective in failing to request a charge on the lesserincluded offense when the evidence showed either the commission of the completed offense as charged or the commission of no offense such that the defendant was not entitled to a charge on the lesser offense
C: holding that trial counsels decision to submit evidence to the jury that his confession was coerced rather than submitting the evidence to the judge in a motion to suppress was a matter of trial strategy and thus did not constitute ineffective assistance
D: holding that the right to request a lesserincluded offense instruction is neither a constitutional nor a fundamental right and the decision of whether to request a lesserincluded offense instruction is a complicated one involving legal expertise and trial strategy
A.