Filed: February 21, 2003
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-4547
(CR-01-47)
United States of America,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
Tyrone Jackson,
Defendant - Appellant.
O R D E R
The court amends its opinion filed February 10, 2003, as
follows:
On the cover sheet, section 3, line 3 -- the district judge’s
name is corrected to read “Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge.”
For the Court - By Direction
/s/ Patricia S. Connor
Clerk
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444447
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v. No. 02-4547
TYRONE JACKSON,
Defendant-Appellant.
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444448
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville.
Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge.
(CR-01-47)
Submitted: January 29, 2003
Decided: February 10, 2003
Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
____________________________________________________________
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
____________________________________________________________
COUNSEL
Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon,
Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellant. Frank D. Whitney, United States Attorney, Anne M.
Hayes, Assistant United States Attorney, Christine Witcover Dean,
Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appel-
lee.
____________________________________________________________
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
Local Rule 36(c).
____________________________________________________________
OPINION
PER CURIAM:
Tyrone Jackson appeals his convictions for armed bank robbery
under 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a)(d) (2001), brandishing a firearm during a
crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(iii) (2001), and aid-
ing and abetting under 18 U.S.C. § 2 (2000), and his subsequent 144-
month sentence. On appeal, Jackson asserts the evidence was insuffi-
cient to sustain his convictions. Finding no reversible error, we
affirm.
In reviewing a sufficiency of the evidence claim on appeal, we
must sustain the verdict if the record contains "substantial evidence,
taking the view most favorable to the Government, to support it."
Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 80 (1942). Applying this stan-
dard, we give due regard to the fact finder's prerogative to resolve
questions of credibility. United States v. Burgos, 94 F.3d 849, 862-63
(4th Cir. 1996). With these principles in mind, we conclude the Gov-
ernment presented sufficient evidence for a reasonable trier of fact to
find Jackson guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the charges against
him.
Accordingly, we affirm Jackson's convictions and sentence. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argu-
ment would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2