context: Suniga offers no factual allegations indicating that his counsel's performance in securing a plea agreement was objectively unreasonable or that there was a reasonable probability that the government or the court would have accepted any alternative proposal.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 62 F.3d 323, 327
citation_a.parenthetical: 'Without any showing that ... such plea would have .been acceptable to the court, or that the resulting sentence would have been different than that imposed ... all that the Defendant urges is speculation."
citation_a.sentence: See United States v. Boone, 62 F.3d 323, 327 (10th Cir.1995) (‘Without any showing that ... such plea would have .been acceptable to the court, or that the resulting sentence would have been different than that imposed ... all that the Defendant urges is speculation.”). He additionally claims the district court should have scheduled an evidentiary hearing, but we see no basis for concluding that such a hearing would have advanced his argument.
citation_b.signal: cf.
citation_b.identifier: 676 F.3d 1211, 1214
citation_b.parenthetical: "Given the conclusory nature of Defendant's allegations, the district court's denial of an evi- dentiary hearing was not an abuse of discretion"
citation_b.sentence: Cf. United States v. Moya, 676 F.3d 1211, 1214 (10th Cir.2012) (“Given the conclusory nature of Defendant’s allegations, the district court’s denial of an evi- dentiary hearing was not an abuse of discretion”)-