The counsel conceded dtiring sentencing that "it was his
fault that Mr. Summerville was faced with the increased penalty
because he failed to investigate and review the files before
he advised Summerville to accept a 10 yr to life plea".
Counsel asked the court to withdraw the plea and the court
denied it. Therefore, was the counsel ineffective during the
critical stages and should the petitioner be allowed to withdrawThe
the plea?

The petitioner filed a 2255 and raised the numerous constitu
tional claims and ineffective claims, in which the Court immediately
Granted a Evidentiary Hearing and transported the petitioner to
the Courts jurisdiction. However, the petitioner had a new
counsel who had not prafcKLfed; criminal law for years and instead
did real estate law.. On the morning of the Evidentiary hearing,
with all parties there, the new counsel moved for continuance and
the court granted it. But while the petitioner was in the holding
facility, the new counsel "moved to strike all of the petitioners
original claims and filed a new claim outside of the 1 yr time-
frame and then even requested that no evidentiary hearing be
granted all in the same breadth". Therefore, the Court denied the
2255 and the Evidentiary Hearing. Was the post-conviction counsel
ineffective?

Was the post-conviction counsel ineffective?