US v. Luis Renteria
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 7:12-cr-00037-FA-10. Copies to all parties and the district court. . [16-4021]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington.
David A. Faber,
Senior District Judge. (7:12-cr-00037-FA-10)
December 12, 2016
December 16, 2016
Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jenna T. Blue, BLUE LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant.
John Stuart Bruce, United States Attorney, Jennifer P. MayParker, First Assistant United States Attorney, Kristine L.
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
Luis Renteria pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute and
to possess with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of
cocaine, 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846 (2012).
The district court
Sentencing Guidelines Manual §§ 2D1.1(d)(1), 2A1.1 (2014), and
findings for clear error.
308 (4th Cir. 2014).
United States v. Cox, 744 F.3d 305,
The Guidelines provide, “[i]f a victim was
killed under circumstances that would constitute murder under 18
territorial or maritime jurisdiction of the United States, [a
sentencing court should] apply § 2A1.1 (First Degree Murder). .
USSG § 2D1.1(d)(1).
First degree murder includes both
premeditated and felony murder.
USSG § 2A1.1, cmt. n.2. The
States v. Davis, 679 F.3d 177, 182 (4th Cir. 2012).
sentencing purposes, the Guidelines provide for consideration,
Pg: 3 of 3
“in the case of a jointly undertaken criminal activity . . . ,
[of] all reasonably foreseeable acts and omissions of others in
furtherance of the jointly undertaken criminal activity, that
occurred during the commission of the offense of conviction [or]
in preparation for that offense.” USSG § 1B1.3(a)(1)(B).
conduct of others under subsection (a)(1)(B), the court must
particular defendant agreed to jointly undertake.”
We hold that the district court did not err in applying the
Evidence presented to the court disclosed that
Renteria was angry that Geniro Jamis had stolen $150,000 in drug
proceeds from him and that Renteria paid co-conspirators $15,000
to kidnap, torture, and murder Jamis.
because the facts and legal arguments are adequately presented
in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?