Kurt Alan Stand appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his motion filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). We previously granted a certificate of appealability on two issues raised before us: whether counsel was ineffective and whether the district court should have considered the declaration of Lothar Ziemer when ruling on the motion. 1 Having considered the materials filed by the parties, we now vacate the district court’s order insofar as it relates to the ineffective assistance claim. We remand for an evidentiary hearing on whether defense counsel labored under an actual conflict of interest that adversely affected his performance. 2 See United States v. Nicholson, 475 F.3d 241 (4th Cir. 2007). We leave to the district court to determine what relevance, if any, the Ziemer declaration may have to resolution of this claim.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not significantly aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED IN PART; VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART.