Flores v. Stephens

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “§ 2241 is a vehicle not for challenging prison conditions, but for challenging matters concerning the execution of a sentence such as the computation of good-time credits.”
• holding that the district court properly construed the filing as a Bivens action when plaintiff alleged that he was 4 deprived of a right secured by the United States Constitution by persons acting under color of federal law
• noting that § 2241 “is a vehicle...for challenging matters concerning the execution of a sentence such as the computation of good-time credits”
• noting that § 2241 “is a vehicle . . . for challenging matters concerning the execution of a sentence such as the computation of good-time credits”
• finding district court properly construed action as a Bivens action because plaintiff alleged he was deprived of a right secured by the United States Constitution by persons acting under color of federal law
• construing conditions-of-confinement claims as properly brought in a civil action under Bivens

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).