Filed: Feb. 29, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-8521 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus EDDIE JEFFERSON, a/k/a Ice, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Chief District Judge. (CR-92-314-A) Submitted: February 7, 1996 Decided: February 29, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished p
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-8521 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus EDDIE JEFFERSON, a/k/a Ice, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Chief District Judge. (CR-92-314-A) Submitted: February 7, 1996 Decided: February 29, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished pe..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-8521 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus EDDIE JEFFERSON, a/k/a Ice, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Chief District Judge. (CR-92-314-A) Submitted: February 7, 1996 Decided: February 29, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eddie Jefferson, Appellant Pro Se. Philip Eric Urofsky, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying Appellant's motion for evidentiary hearing on the evidence, merits and testimony of defendant's substantial assistance. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Jefferson, No. CR-92-314-A (E.D. Va. Nov. 22, 1995). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma- terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2