Order

This is an ineffective assistance of counsel case. The primary issue is whether, in a bench trial, a criminal defendant was prejudiced when the prosecutor questioned him regarding the facts that underlay his previous convictions. We hold that the defendant was not prejudiced because the court, when sitting as the trier-of-fact, is deemed to have disregarded any inadmissible evidence, and in this case the court stated for the record that it was disregarding the subject evidence. We also hold that the record supports a finding that the defendant’s trial counsel explained to him that he would in fact be cross-examined regarding his prior convictions. Further, the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law were sufficient to provide meaningful appellate review. Therefore, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).