US v. Straws, No. 07-4238 (4th Cir. 2007)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-4238 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JABBAR JOMO STRAWS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief District Judge. (3:05-cr-00684-JFA) Submitted: November 26, 2007 Decided: December 6, 2007 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nathaniel Roberson, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. Tara L. McGregor, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jabbar Jomo Straws pled guilty to one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition. He was sentenced to a term of 210 months imprisonment. On appeal, Straws attorney has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), concluding that there are no meritorious issues for appeal but raising as potential issues whether the district court fully complied with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11, and whether the district court properly handled Straws pro se motions at sentencing. Although advised of his right to do so, Straws has not filed a pro se supplemental brief. First, we have thoroughly reviewed the record and find that the district court fully complied with the requirements of Rule 11 at Straws guilty plea hearing. Next, our review of Straws pro se motions and his colloquy with the district court at sentencing regarding those motions discloses that Straws knowingly and willingly withdrew the motions after ample opportunity to be heard and confer with counsel. In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record for any meritorious issues and have found Accordingly, we affirm the district court s judgment. none. This court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If the client requests that a petition be filed, but - 2 - counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move representation. in this court for leave to withdraw from Counsel s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client. 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 - 3 -
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
