The following excerpt is from Sheehan v. U.S., 880 F.2d 416 (9th Cir. 1989):
We review de novo the denial of a 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 motion. United States v. Quan, 789 F.2d 711, 713 (9th Cir.), cert. dismissed, 478 U.S. 1033 (1986). The district court may deny a Sec. 2255 motion without a hearing where "the motion and the files and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief." 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255. We will affirm the district court when a petitioner's allegations "viewed against the record, either fail to state a claim for relief or are 'so palpably incredible or patently frivolous as to warrant summary dismissal.' " Marrow v. United States, 772 F.2d 525, 526 (9th Cir.1985) (quoting United States v. Schaflander 743 F.2d 714, 717 (9th Cir.1984).
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.