The following excerpt is from U.S. v. McCoy, 134 F.3d 380 (9th Cir. 1997):
We find that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Defendant's request for an evidentiary hearing. An evidentiary hearing is not required "where there [is] nothing to be gained by such a hearing." United States v. Scott, 521 F.2d 1188, 1196 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 424 U.S. 955 (1976). The district court's conclusion that an evidentiary hearing was not necessary to determine the issues before it was entirely reasonable and within the province of its discretion. See, e.g, United States v. Colacurcio, 499 F.2d 1401, 1406 n. 7 (9th Cir.1974) (new trial motions "are ordinarily decided solely upon affidavits"); United States v. Slocum, 708 F.2d 587, 600 (11th Cir.1983) (where the defendants failed to even file an affidavit by the one person whose information came closest to requiring a new trial, the district court "did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion without an evidentiary hearing").
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.