The People v. Samual Nektalov

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that it was not clearly established in 2002 that forcing a prisoner to sleep \without a mattress” but with \a bed and a blanket” violated the Eighth Amendment
• holding that a California prisoner placed on contraband watch for six 18 days could not claim a liberty interest under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth 19 Amendment
• finding officials entitled to qualified immunity for Eighth Amendment lighting claim by prisoner on contraband watch who did not claim sleep deprivation
• finding it was not 5 - OPINION AND ORDER clearly established “that constant illumination violates the Eighth Amendment when done for a legitimate penological purpose”
• finding it was not clearly established “that constant illumination violates the Eighth Amendment when done for a legitimate penological purpose”
• granting qualified immunity where there was a legitimate penological purpose for constant illumination

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).