Arciniega v. Freeman

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that pro se complaints “hovvever inartfully pleaded,” are held to “less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers”
• rejecting a vagueness challenge to the same communication condition at issue here
• “Courts routinely hold that a probation or parole condition proscribing associating with a person or group refers to planned, prolonged contact as distinguished from chance or casual meetings.”
• “We do not believe that the parole condition restricting association was intended to apply to incidental contacts between ex-convicts in the course of work on a legitimate job for a common employer.”
• “[The] petitioner was forbidden to ‘associate’ with other ex- convicts. *** We do not believe that the parole condition restricting association was intended to apply to incidental contacts between ex-convicts in the course of work on a legitimate job for a common employer.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).