People v. Njoku

How courts have described this case

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

• also recognizing a role for “the trial judge’s personal knowledge” of the proceedings in resolving Section 2255 motions
• “[Review of] ‘the fact-finding procedure’ ... does not apply in the case of a federal prisoner; federal fact-finding procedures are by hypothesis adequate to assure the integrity of the underlying constitutional rights.”
• “Where a trial or appellate court has determined the federal prisoner’s claim, discretion may in a proper case be exercised against the grant of a § 2255 hearing.”
• collateral review in federal court after procedural default in federal trial court
• section 2255 provides “a remedy exactly commensurate with that which had previously been available by habeas corpus in the court of the district where the prisoner was confined” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)
• “there is no reason to ... give greater preclusive effect to procedural defaults by federal defendant than to similar defaults by state defendants. To hold otherwise would reflect an anomalous and erroneous view of federal-state relations.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).