the court shall cause notice thereof to be served upon the United States attorney, grant a prompt hearing thereon, determine the issues and make findings of fact and conclusions of law with respect thereto. 28 U.S.C. § 2255(b). “[I]f the petitioner alleges facts that, if true, would entitle him to relief, then the district court should order an evidentiary hearing and rule on the merits of his claim.” Aron, 291 F.3d at 714-15 (quotation omitted). In addition, a court is required to liberally construe a pro se petitioner’s claim. Diaz v. United States, 930 F.2d 832, 834 (11th Cir.1991). In Aron, we stated: The law is clear that, in order to be entitled to an evidentiary hearing, a petitioner need only allege-not prove-reasonably specific, non-conclusory facts that, if tr (5th Cir.1972) (<HOLDING>). A district court is not required to hold a
holding that disputed issues of fact cannot be resolved based on affidavits and must be decided based on evidentiary hearings the only admissible procedure for resolving such issues holding that an evidentiary hearing is not required if there are no factual issues in dispute holding that an evidentiary hearing may be used to develop the factual basis of a prisoner complaint holding that contested factual issues in  2255 cases must be decided on the basis of an evidentiary hearing not affidavits holding plenary hearings are required when there are contested issues of material fact on the basis of conflicting affidavits