Whether an indigent and incarcerated defendant with minimal education and no English comprehension, raising a colorable ineffective assistance of counsel claim on direct appeal, should be granted an evidentiary hearing rather than be required to file a future pro se § 2255 motion

Petitioner is an indigent federal defendant serving a 168-month prison sentence. He obtained only a sixth-grade education in Mexico and does not comprehend English. On direct appeal to the Fifth Circuit, with the assistance of appointed counsel, he raised a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, alleging that his former appointed counsel misrepresented petitioner’s plea agreement — written in English — that caused petitioner’s guilty plea to be involuntary. In his Fifth Circuit brief, although petitioner pointed to portions of the record supporting his claim, he acknowledged the resolution of his claim would require further factual development at an evidentiary hearing. He thus requested a remand to the district court for an evidentiary hearing at which he would be represented by his new counsel on appeal (but acknowledged that Fifth Circuit precedent foreclosed his request). The question presented is: Whether, if an indigent and incarcerated defendant with mini mal education and no ability to comprehend English, for the first time on direct appeal with the assistance of appointed counsel, raises a colorable claim of ineffective assistance by his former counsel, should the U.S. Court of Appeals remand the case to the district court to conduct an evidentiary hearing on the claim (where the defendant would be represented by appointed coun sel) rather than require the defendant to assert his claim in a future pro se motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. il