Aso Pola v. United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an evidentiary hearing is “mandatory unless the record conclusively shows that the petitioner is entitled to no relief”
• holding that the district court “erred by considering only whether [counsel] was ineffective in the event that [the defendant] did not expressly instruct his attorney to file an appeal”
• directing that credibility concerns raised by a \self-serving\ affidavit be addressed in an evidentiary hearing
• noting in dicta that “[i]f [petitioner] were permanently inadmissible to the United States based on ‘a wholly separate’ prior criminal conviction, then we might evaluate mootness considerations differently”
• vacating a district court’s denial of a § 2255 motion and remanding for an evidentiary hearing based on allegations that counsel was ineffective for failing to follow a petitioner’s instructions to file a notice of appeal
• \[T]he district court appears to find [the petitioner's] credibility lacking because the affidavit is 'self-serving.' But an affidavit is not incredible just because the asserted facts favor the affiant.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).