Edward W. Newfield 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.

• noting that a motion supported by a “sufficient” affidavit including detailed and controverted issues of fact warrants a hearing, but “bald allegations” unsupported by evidentiary facts do not
• filing of motion “does not entitle petitioner automatically to a hearing”
• “‘It does not follow that because a person is mentally ill he is not competent to stand trial’ ”
• a motion supported by a 4 “sufficient” affidavit including detailed and controverted issues 5 of fact warrants a hearing, but “bald allegations” unsupported by 6 evidentiary facts do not
• defendant was not entitled to a hearing on his claims of incompetency at the time of trial where there was no assertion of new information and the trial judge reviewing the petition “had ample opportunity to observe the appellant’s demeanor and behavior in the courtroom”
• “The motion does not entitle petitioner automatically to a hearing.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).