United States of America v. Quinton Omar Jackson

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
QUINTON OMAR JACKSON,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-56149
D.C. Nos. 3:16-cv-01545-DMS
3:08-cr-04324-DMS-2
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Dana M. Sabraw, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted February 6, 2019
Pasadena, California
Before: GOULD and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges, and MARBLEY,** District
Judge.
Defendant Quinton Omar Jackson appeals the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255
motion challenging his sentence on one count of using or carrying a firearm during
a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). We have jurisdiction under 28
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The Honorable Algenon L. Marbley, United States District Judge for
the Southern District of Ohio, sitting by designation.
FILED
AUG 14 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
U.S.C. § 2253. Reviewing the denial of a § 2255 motion de novo, United States v.
Reves, 774 F.3d 562, 564 (9th Cir. 2014), we affirm. Even assuming that
Jackson’s appeal is not barred by the appellate waiver in his plea agreement, his
argument that his underlying conviction for robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 2111 is not
a crime of violence is foreclosed by our precedent. See United States v. Fultz, 923
F.3d 1192, 1197 (9th Cir. 2019) (“Robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2111 is a
‘crime of violence’ under the elements clause of § 924(c)(3)(A).”).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --