context: In light of the above, Petitioner Casas is not entitled on collateral review to reliti-gate issues raised on direct appeal, absent an intervening change in the law.
citation_a.signal: no signal
citation_a.identifier: 417 U.S. 333, 342
citation_a.parenthetical: holding that a SS 2255 hearing is permitted on an issue previously addressed on direct appeal when there has been an intervening change in the law
citation_a.sentence: Davis v. United States, 417 U.S. 333, 342, 94 S.Ct. 2298, 41 L.Ed.2d 109 (1974) (holding that a § 2255 hearing is permitted on an issue previously addressed on direct appeal when there has been an intervening change in the law).
citation_b.signal: cf.
citation_b.identifier: 901 F.2d 5, 6
citation_b.parenthetical: "We note that certain other claims raised in the SS 2255 motion were decided on direct appeal and may not be relitigated under a different label on collateral review."
citation_b.sentence: Cf. Singleton v. United States, 26 F.3d 233, 240 (1st Cir.1993) (“‘[Ijssues disposed of in a prior appeal will not be reviewed again by way of a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion.’ ”) (quoting Dirring v. United States, 370 F.2d 862, 864 (1st Cir.1967)); United States v. Michaud, 901 F.2d 5, 6 (1st Cir.1990)(“We note that certain other claims raised in the § 2255 motion were decided on direct appeal and may not be relitigated under a different label on collateral review.”).