United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Paul D. Katekaru, Defendant-appellant, 45 F.3d 440 (10th Cir. 1995)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT¹ 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir.R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

This appeal is from an order of the district court denying pro se petitioner Katekaru's motion filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct a sentence and finding that no evidentiary hearing was required on petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel because these allegations were completely and conclusively refuted by petitioner's statements and insufficient to trigger the hearing requirement of 2255. Hampton v. United States, 504 F.2d 600 (10th Cir. 1974). Petitioner was released from custody by the Bureau of Prisons on November 15, 1993. We affirm.

The government argues that there have been no collateral legal consequences as a result of the challenged conviction and, therefore, that because the petitioner is no longer in custody this 2255 motion is moot. Without determining whether any collateral legal consequences have been imposed, we find that the district court did not err in determining that no evidentiary hearing was required on petitioner's allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to vacate, set aside, or correct petitioner's sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255. AFFIRMED. The mandate shall issue forthwith.