Filed: Apr. 26, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6105 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. CHRISTOPHER ANDRE JACKMON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:04-cr-00104-CMH-1) Submitted: April 19, 2012 Decided: April 26, 2012 Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christopher And
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6105 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. CHRISTOPHER ANDRE JACKMON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:04-cr-00104-CMH-1) Submitted: April 19, 2012 Decided: April 26, 2012 Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christopher Andr..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6105 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. CHRISTOPHER ANDRE JACKMON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:04-cr-00104-CMH-1) Submitted: April 19, 2012 Decided: April 26, 2012 Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christopher Andre Jackmon, Appellant Pro Se. William Neil Hammerstrom, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Christopher Andre Jackmon appeals the district court’s order denying without an evidentiary hearing his self-styled “Motion for Specific Performance of Language of Plea Agreement/Oral Promise(s).” We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Jackmon, No. 1:04-cr-00104-CMH-1 (E.D. Va. Dec. 21, 2011). 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 2
