Benito Jiminian, - V- John Nash, Warden Fci Ray Brook

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that § 2255 “is generally the proper vehicle for a federal prisoner’s challenge to his conviction and sentence”
• concluding that § 2241 challenges to the execution of a federal sentence include prison conditions
• holding that a motion under Section 2255 “is generally the proper vehicle for a federal prisoner’s challenge to his conviction and sentence.”
• holding that concerns raised in Adams v. United States, 155 F.3d 582 (2d Cir. 1998) did not apply where s prior Section 2255 motion attacking the A Section 2255 motion must be brought in the district of conviction. See Panico v. United States, 412 F.2d 1151, 1155-56 (2d Cir. 1969
• allowing an ADMAX prisoner to use § 2241 to attack the same SAMs challenged by Mr. Pinson
• listing “computation of a prisoner’s sentence by prison officials” as permissible grounds for a section 2241 petition

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).