United States v. Claude S. Birtle

How courts have described this case

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

• finding no per se prejudice when defendant's appellate counsel failed to appear at oral argument or file a reply brief
• affirming the denial of defendant's Sec. 2255 petition alleging that counsel was ineffective for failing to file a reply brief
• rejecting the view that failure of counsel to appear at oral argument amounts to a per se Sixth Amendment violation, noting that “[o]ral argument on appeal is not required by the Constitution in all cases; nor is it necessarily essential to a fair hearing”
• “A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is a mixed question of law and fact that is reviewed de novo.”
• an evidentiary hearing is not required if the motion, files and records of the case 5 conclusively show petitioner is entitled to no relief
• an 22 evidentiary hearing is not required if the motion, files and records of the case 23 conclusively show petitioner is entitled to no relief

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).