United States v. Maurice Cowan

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 25-3399 ___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Maurice La'Von Cowan

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ___________________________

No. 25-3402 ___________________________

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________

Appeals from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Eastern ____________ Submitted: April 14, 2026 Filed: June 1, 2026 [Unpublished] ____________

Before SHEPHERD, ERICKSON, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

In these consolidated appeals, Maurice Cowan challenges the revocation sentence the district court1 imposed after revoking his supervised release for two separate convictions. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief challenging the substantive reasonableness of the sentence.

Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude that Cowan’s sentence was not unreasonable, as there is no indication that the district court failed to consider the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) 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, 923-24 (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; court may consider criminal history and history on supervised release); United States v. Beckwith, 57 F.4th 630, 632 (8th Cir. 2023) (per curiam) (revocation sentence within Guidelines range is accorded a presumption of substantive reasonableness on appeal).

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

1 The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.

-2-