Patrick Ferguson was charged by accusation with possession of marijuana with the intent to distribute. His first trial ended in a mistrial after the jury was unable to reach a verdict. After a second trial, he was found guilty and sentenced as a recidivist. His amended motion for new trial was denied, and he appeals, contending that his counsel was ineffective in failing to file a motion to suppress and that his Batson motion should have been granted. We disagree and affirm. 1. Ferguson contends that his counsel was ineffective in failing to file a motion to suppress evidence obtained under a search warrant for a package delivered to a UPS store and claimed by Ferguson. But while he raised the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel in his amended motion for new trial, Ferguson asserted only that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to subpoena witnesses. He failed to raise the issue of the execution of the search warrant in his motion for new trial, and he therefore has “waived the right to argue this issue on appeal.1 Where the issue of trial counsel’s effectiveness has been raised on motion for new trial, any claims not raised at that time are waived.” Citations and punctuation omitted. Godfrey v. State , 274 Ga. App. 237, 240 1 d 617 SE2d 213 2005.
Even had it not been waived, Ferguson’s claim of ineffective assistance is wholly without merit. Citing no legal authority save OCGA § 17-5-21 a and Strickland v. Washington , 466 U. S. 668 104 SC 2052, 80 LE2d 674 1984, he argues that because the search warrant named the package itself and not his automobile, officers were required to execute the warrant before he entered his car. But “search warrants are not directed at persons; they authorize the search of ‘places’ and the seizure of ‘things,’ and as a constitutional matter they need not even name the person from whom the things will be seized.” Citations and punctuation omitted. Scott v. State , 213 Ga. App. 84, 86 1 444 SE2d 96 1994. “If a search warrant, read as a whole, points out the premises, person or property to the exclusion of all others, and on inquiry leads the officers unerringly to them, it meets the description requirement.” Citations and punctuation omitted. Minter v. State, 206 Ga. App. 692, 693 1 426 SE2d 169 1992. The police obtained a search warrant for a particular package “located at 4002 Stone Mountain Highway U.S. 78, Suite 530, Snellville, Gwinnett County, Georgia.” The supporting affidavit described the package, including its specific tracking number. The package was located at that address and was seized at that address, although Ferguson was at the point of departing with the package in his vehicle at the time officers seized it. “Failure to raise a meritless objection cannot constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. Cits.” Wright v. State , 265 Ga. App. 855, 858 1 c 595 SE2d 664 2004. This enumeration of error is without merit.
