Case ID: f-appx_242/html/0001-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Adrian Howard JACKSON, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 07-6587.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Sept. 11, 2007.
    Decided: Sept. 14, 2007.
    Adrian Howard Jackson, Appellant Pro Se. Marshall Prince, Office of the United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

Adrian Howard Jackson appeals the district court’s order denying his Rule 59(e) motion to reconsider the denial of his Rule 60(b)(4) motion and alternatively to allow his pleadings to serve as a notice of appeal of the Rule 60(b) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Jackson, No. 0:98-cr-01126-JFA (D.S.C. Mar. 30, 2007). 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.