Because of the broad allegations of knowing use of perjured testimony at his (Russell’s) trial, it is our judgment that the district court’s order denying relief must be reversed, and it is so ordered.

The government should be directed to respond to appellant’s petition. Obviously appellant can be required to particularize his claim. Perhaps a deposition taken of appellant would show more clearly whether a hearing need be held, or, if held, whether there is any need for Russell’s presence.

The remand is without limitation as to scope.