United States v. Kevin Adams
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.
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Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Western ____________ Submitted: March 16, 2026 Filed: March 19, 2026 [Unpublished] ____________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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Kevin Adams, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-kevin-adams-ca8-2026.