US v. Jackson, No. 07-4164 (4th Cir. 2007)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-4164 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DAMION DAMONE JACKSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. (3:01-cr-00083) Submitted: July 24, 2007 Decided: July 27, 2007 Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Emily Marroquin, FEDERAL DEFENDERS OF WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA, INC., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Brian Steven Cromwell, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Damion Damone Jackson appeals from the district court s order revoking his supervised release and imposing a twelve-month and one-day term of imprisonment.* Counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), alleging that there are no meritorious claims on appeal but raising one issue: whether the sentence is plainly unreasonable. Jackson was informed of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but has not done so. Finding no reversible error, we affirm. We find that Jackson s sentence, imposed within his properly-calculated unreasonable. advisory sentencing range, is not plainly See United States v. Crudup, 461 F.3d 433, 437 (4th Cir. 2006) (providing review standard), cert. denied, 127 S. Ct. 1813 (2007); 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3) (2000); U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual, § 7B1.4(a), p.s. (2006) (revocation table). We have examined the entire record in this case in accordance with the requirements of Anders, and find no meritorious issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm. This court requires that counsel inform her client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If the client requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may * The court also sentenced him to two years of supervised release thereafter. - 2 - move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED - 3 -
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
