United States v. Eric Jackson

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: March 14, 2025
• Docket: 24-6937
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 24-6937 Doc: 11 Filed: 03/14/2025 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-6937

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: March 11, 2025 Decided: March 14, 2025

Before NIEMEYER, RICHARDSON, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Eric L. Jackson, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer Therese Conklin, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-6937 Doc: 11 Filed: 03/14/2025 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Eric L. Jackson appeals the district court’s order denying his second 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 the district court found Jackson eligible for

relief, the court exercised its discretion and declined to reduce Jackson’s term of

imprisonment. In so doing, the district 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 sentence reduction; and explained its rationale for denying the

motion, which was rooted in the § 3553(a) factors. On this record, we discern no abuse of

the court’s considerable discretion. See United States v. Reed, 58 F.4th 816, 819 (4th Cir.

2023) (providing standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order.

United States v. Jackson, No. 5:01-cr-00004-JPB-MJA-1 (N.D. W. Va. Sept. 13, 2024).

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