Legal Opinion

Joseph v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided July 14, 2005No. 99-CF-979, 99-CO-1555, and 03-CO-1425PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KING, Senior Judge:

In this appeal, Quincy Joseph argues that the trial court abused its discretion in denying without a hearing his motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence filed pursuant to D.C.Code § 23-110 (2001), and in failing to rule on his claim that trial counsel was ineffective in not advising appellant to maintain his initial guilty plea prior to its successful withdrawal. Because an evidentiary hearing is necessary to resolve disputed material facts, we remand the record for further proceedings.

I

A. FACTS

According to the government’s evidence, on the evening of December 27,…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Watson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
  3. Ramsey v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
  4. Gibson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1978
  5. Byrd v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Long v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2006
  2. Hilliard v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
  3. Jones v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007
  4. Jones v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007
  5. People v. DavisColorado Court of Appeals · 2012

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API