United States v. Kenneth Moore

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 20, 2026
Docket25-3063
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Kenneth Moore (United States v. Kenneth Moore) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Kenneth Moore, (8th Cir. 2026).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 25-3063 ___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Kenneth L. Moore

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis ____________

Submitted: February 17, 2026 Filed: February 20, 2026 [Unpublished] ____________

Before LOKEN, SMITH, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Kenneth Moore appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm pursuant to a written plea

1 The Honorable Rodney W. Sippel, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. agreement containing a limited appeal waiver. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the term of supervised release as substantively unreasonable.

After careful review, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Moore. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (standard of review); see also United States v. Adams, 12 F.4th 883, 889 (8th Cir. 2021) (term of supervised release is part of sentence); United States v. Callaway, 762 F.3d 754, 760 (8th Cir. 2014) (on appeal, within-Guidelines-range sentence may be presumed reasonable). Further, having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw and affirm. ______________________________

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Penson v. Ohio
488 U.S. 75 (Supreme Court, 1988)
United States v. Feemster
572 F.3d 455 (Eighth Circuit, 2009)
United States v. Stuart Adams
12 F.4th 883 (Eighth Circuit, 2021)
United States v. Callaway
762 F.3d 754 (Eighth Circuit, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Kenneth Moore, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-kenneth-moore-ca8-2026.