United States v. Eric Jackson ( 2020 )


Menu:
  •                                      UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 20-6590
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    ERIC L. JACKSON, a/k/a Tango,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at
    Wheeling. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (5:01-cr-00004-JPB-MJA-1)
    Submitted: November 17, 2020                                Decided: November 20, 2020
    Before MOTZ and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Eric L. Jackson, Appellant Pro Se. Jeffrey Akira Finucane, Assistant United States
    Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Martinsburg, West
    Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Eric L. Jackson appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence
    reduction under § 404 of the First Step Act of 2018 (“First Step Act”), Pub. L. No. 115-
    391, 
    132 Stat. 5194
    , 5222. Although it found Jackson eligible for relief, the court exercised
    its discretion and declined to reduce Jackson’s term of imprisonment. In so doing, the court
    accurately described the procedural history and applicable law; evaluated the relevant 
    18 U.S.C. § 3553
    (a) factors and Jackson’s arguments in favor of a reduction; and explained
    its reasons for denying the motion. On this record, we discern no abuse of the court’s
    considerable discretion. See United States v. Jackson, 
    952 F.3d 492
    , 495-97 (4th Cir. 2020)
    (reviewing decision on First Step Act motion for abuse of discretion). Accordingly, we
    affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Jackson, No. 5:01-cr-
    00004-JPB-MJA-1 (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 14, 2020). We deny Jackson’s motions for the
    appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
    contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would
    not aid the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 20-6590

Filed Date: 11/20/2020

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/20/2020