United States v. Kevin Adams

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedMarch 19, 2026
Docket25-3009, 25-3010
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Kevin Adams (United States v. Kevin Adams) 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. Kevin Adams, (8th Cir. 2026).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 25-3009 ___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Kevin Adams

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ___________________________

No. 25-3010 ___________________________

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________

Appeals from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Western ____________ Submitted: March 16, 2026 Filed: March 19, 2026 [Unpublished] ____________

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

PER CURIAM.

In these consolidated appeals, Kevin Adams appeals after the district court1 revoked his supervised release and sentenced him to 22 months in prison and 1 year of supervised release, with special conditions. His counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief challenging the substantive reasonableness of the sentences.

Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude that Adams’s sentences were not unreasonable, as there is no indication that the district court failed to consider the relevant factors, gave significant weight to an improper or irrelevant factor, or committed a clear error of judgment in weighing the relevant factors. See United States v. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 923 (8th Cir. 2006) (sentence may be unreasonable if district court fails to consider relevant factor, gives significant weight to improper factor, or commits clear error of judgment); United States v. Beckwith, 57 F.4th 630, 632-33 (8th Cir. 2023) (per curiam) (court properly considered criminal history and characteristics; revocation sentences within Guidelines range are accorded a presumption of substantive reasonableness on appeal).

Accordingly, we affirm, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. ______________________________

1 The Honorable Leonard T. Strand, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.

-2-

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

Related

United States v. Duane Larison
432 F.3d 921 (Eighth Circuit, 2006)
United States v. Carl Beckwith, Jr.
57 F.4th 630 (Eighth Circuit, 2023)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Kevin Adams, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-kevin-adams-ca8-2026.