The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Stearns, 68 F.3d 328 (9th Cir. 1995):
We review the district court's denial of a 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 motion de novo. United States v. Roberts, 5 F.3d 365, 368 (9th Cir.1993). We review the district court's findings of fact for clear error. Id. We review the district court's resolution of claims of ineffective assistance of counsel de novo. See United States v. Horodner, 993 F.2d 191, 194 (9th Cir.1993).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.