Was the post-conviction counsel ineffective?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED ) The counsel conceded during 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". The 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 withdzaw the plea? . The petitioner filed a 2255 and raised the numerous constitutional 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 prati¢ed: ériminal 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 timeframe 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? i TT SY OO Ui =