Gambill 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.

• stating that an attorney “is not required by the constitution to raise frivolous defenses or arguments to avoid a charge of ineffective representation”
• stating that an attorney “is not required by the Constitution to raise frivolous defenses or arguments to avoid a charge of ineffective representation”
• appealing a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion that relied on issuing a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253
• “Counsel is not required by the Constitution to raise frivolous . . . arguments to avoid a charge of ineffective representation.” (citation omitted)
• counsel “is not required by the constitution to raise frivolous defenses or arguments to avoid a charge of ineffective representation”
• counsel “is not required by the constitution to raise frivolous defenses or arguments to avoid a charge of ineffective representation”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).