UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-4103

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

KASSAN OSHEA MOUZON,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, 

at Charlotte. Max O. Cogburn, Jr., District Judge. (3:15-cr-00150-MOC-1)

Submitted: March 6, 2018 Decided: March 28, 2018

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed in part, affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Anthony Martinez, Federal Public Defender, Ann L. Hester, Assistant Federal Public 

Defender, FEDERAL DEFENDERS OF WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA, INC., 

Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States 

Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM: 

Kassan Oshea Mouzon pleaded guilty to possession of a firearm by a felon, in 

violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2012). The district court sentenced Mouzon to 33 

months of imprisonment, followed by 2 years of supervised release, and Mouzon now 

appeals. Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 

738 (1967), questioning whether the district court correctly concluded that Mouzon’s 

prior North Carolina conviction for robbery with a dangerous weapon is a crime of 

violence under the Guidelines, but conceding that this argument is foreclosed by binding 

circuit precedent. Mouzon was advised of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but 

has not done so. For the reasons that follow, we dismiss the appeal in part and affirm in 

part. 

During the pendency of this appeal, Mouzon was released from incarceration; 

counsel concedes that any challenge to the length of his incarceration is therefore moot. 

“[A] case is moot when the issues presented are no longer live or the parties lack a legally 

cognizable interest in the outcome.” United States v. Hardy, 545 F.3d 280, 283 (4th Cir. 

2008) (internal quotation marks omitted). Upon the expiration of a defendant’s sentence 

“some concrete and continuing injury other than the now-ended incarceration or parole—

some collateral consequence of the conviction—must exist if the suit is to be 

maintained.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). Because Mouzon has served his 

term of imprisonment, there is no longer a live controversy regarding the length of his 

confinement. Therefore, his challenge to the district court’s decision to impose a 

33-month term of imprisonment is moot. 
3

We have examined the entire record in accordance with the requirements of 

Anders and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the 

appeal in so far as it challenges the length of Mouzon’s confinement and affirm the 

judgment of the district court in all other respects. This court requires that counsel 

inform Mouzon, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States 

for further review. If Mouzon requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that 

such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to 

withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was 

served on Mouzon. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument 

would not aid in the decisional process. 

DISMISSED IN PART,

AFFIRMED IN PART