The following excerpt is from Barnes v. U.S., 979 F.2d 854 (9th Cir. 1992):
Contrary to Barnes' assertion, the absence of an evidentiary hearing does not prove that the denial of his claim was other than "on the merits". A 2255 motion may be denied on the merits without an evidentiary hearing if the existing files and records "conclusively resolve" the factual issues raised. See Mayes v. Pickett, 537 F.2d 1080, 1083 (9th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 924 (1977). Here, the district court found that the transcript of the Rule 11 proceedings conclusively resolved the issues raised by Barnes. ER at 28-29. We agree. The transcript shows conclusively that at the time Barnes entered his plea, he understood that there was no guarantee that he would receive anything less than the maximum sentence.
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.