United States v. Moss

── United States v. Moss ── Case No.: 26-3016 Court: Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Date: March 23, 2026 Category: General Appellate Case: 26-3016 Document: 15 Date Filed: 03/23/2026 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT March 23, 2026 _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. No. 26-3016 (D.C. Nos. 6:25-CV-01239-JWB & ROGER MOSS, 6:20-CR-10038-JWB-1) (D. Kan.) Defendant - Appellant. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT * _________________________________ Before HOLMES, Chief Judge, PHILLIPS and CARSON, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ Roger L. Moss, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for release pending the district court’s decision on the merits of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. We affirm the district court’s denial of the motion for release. A jury convicted Moss of three counts of possession with intent to distribute controlled substances—methamphetamine, heroin, and cocaine; one count of possession of a firearm in relation to a drug trafficking crime; and one count of After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined * unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.  Appellate Case: 26-3016 Document: 15 Date Filed: 03/23/2026 Page: 2 possession of a firearm while an unlawful user of a controlled substance. The district court sentenced him to 255 months’ imprisonment and ordered him to forfeit $25,000 in drug proceeds. Moss appealed. We affirmed the jury’s judgments of conviction, but vacated the forfeiture order. See United States v. Moss, No. 22-3101, 2024 WL 4541738, at *1 (10th Cir. Oct. 22, 2024). Moss next filed a § 2255 motion in October 2025 raising sixteen grounds for relief. In December 2025, he filed a motion for release pending the district court’s resolution of his § 2255 motion. The district court denied the motion for release. Moss now appeals from that denial. Moss argues that the district court’s summary denial of his motion for release “does not comply with the dictates” of Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 9(a), which he asserts applies to a post-conviction detention order by virtue of Rule 9(b). Aplt. Br. at 3. But we agree with the government that Rule 9 governs release in a criminal case, not release pending the court’s consideration of a federal prisoner’s motion for post-conviction relief. 1 We recognize that Rule 9 does permit consideration of a motion for release after a judgment of conviction, see Fed. R. App. P. 9(b), but “[t]he court must make its decision regarding release in accordance with the applicable provisions in [the Bail Reform Act],” Fed. R. App. P. 9(c). And the provision governing 1 Rule