United States v. Santiago Casiano, Jr.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, in reviewing denial of a section 2255 motion, the district court’s findings of fact must be accepted unless clearly erroneous
• “In the first place, it is far from clear that Pena's [the attorney’s] previous dealings with Martinez served to impinge upon Casiano's Sixth Amendment protections”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).