IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-40495

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ALBERTO CEJA-VARGAS, also known as Alan Renteria-Vargas, also known 

as Jose Hernandez-Cardenas,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:13-CR-175

Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Alberto Ceja-Vargas pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with the 

intent to distribute and distribute 500 grams or more of a mixture containing 

methamphetamine and/or 50 grams or more of methamphetamine (actual) and 

100 kilograms or more of marijuana or 100 or more marijuana plants. The 

district court imposed the advisory guidelines sentence of life imprisonment.

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

January 15, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-40495 Document: 00513344425 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/15/2016
No. 15-40495

2

Ceja-Vargas first challenges the district court’s finding on the amount of 

drugs for which he was held responsible for sentencing purposes. The 

presentence report (PSR) and sentencing testimony showed that Ceja-Vargas 

led the Dallas, Texas cell of a drug trafficking organization in 2010 and 2011; 

that the organization transported kilogram quantities of liquid 

methamphetamine from Mexico to Dallas approximately two times per week; 

that the drugs were then converted at the organization’s Dallas-area stash 

house to methamphetamine ice or crystal methamphetamine for further 

distribution; that Ceja-Vargas left the United States and returned to Mexico 

in February or March 2012; and that 5.94 kilograms of methamphetamine 

(actual) were seized from the stash house in September 2012. In addition, 

Ceja-Vargas presented no evidence that he affirmatively withdrew from the 

conspiracy or renounced it. See United States v. Torres, 114 F.3d 520, 525 (5th 

Cir. 1997). Considering the record as a whole, it is plausible that the 

methamphetamine found at the stash house was reasonably foreseeable to 

Ceja-Vargas as a participant in a jointly undertaken criminal activity; thus, 

the district court did not clearly err in determining that he was responsible for 

the 5.94 kilograms of methamphetamine (actual). See United States v. 

Carreon, 11 F.3d 1225, 1230 (5th Cir. 1994). 

Next, Ceja-Vargas argues that the district court clearly erred in applying 

a two-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1) based on a finding that 

a firearm was possessed. This argument ignores the record evidence that 

placed Ceja-Vargas at the stash house prior to his relocating to Mexico in early 

2012; that Ceja-Vargas’s co-conspirators knowingly possessed firearms at the 

stash house in order to further the conspiracy; and that the co-conspirators’

possession was reasonably foreseeable to Ceja-Vargas. Such evidence is

sufficient to support the district court’s imposition of the enhancement under 

 Case: 15-40495 Document: 00513344425 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/15/2016
No. 15-40495

3

§ 2D1.1(b)(1). See United States v. Cisneros-Gutierrez, 517 F.3d 751, 765-66 

(5th Cir. 2008). 

Ceja-Vargas also challenges the district court’s four-level role

enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(a), arguing that there was insufficient 

evidence to establish that he had a substantial leadership role in the 

conspiracy. This argument is unavailing, however, as the PSR and sentencing 

testimony reflected that Ceja-Vargas held a high role in the cartel; that he was 

the boss of the Dallas cell for a two-year period; that he recruited others into 

the conspiracy’s activities; and that he oversaw and organized deliveries of 

contraband to and from Mexico. The evidence thus was sufficient to support 

the district court’s finding that Ceja-Vargas was a leader or organizer of the 

conspiracy. See United States v. Villanueva, 408 F.3d 193, 204 (5th Cir. 2005); 

see also United States v. Cabrera, 288 F.3d 163, 175 n.13 (5th Cir. 2002) (noting 

that more than one person can be a leader).

Ceja-Vargas next contends that his guidelines sentence is substantively 

unreasonable because his co-conspirators were not sentenced to life in prison 

and because the facts set forth in the PSR warranted a lesser sentence. 

Because he did not raise a substantive reasonableness argument in the district 

court, his contentions are reviewed for plain error only. See United States v. 

Peltier, 505 F.3d 389, 392 (5th Cir. 2007). Ceja-Vargas has not made the 

requisite showing. Rather, his arguments amount to no more than a 

disagreement with the propriety of the sentence imposed, which does not 

suffice to show substantive unreasonableness. See United States v. Ruiz, 621 

F.3d 390, 398 (5th Cir. 2010). 

Finally, Ceja-Vargas argues for the first time on appeal that the life 

sentence imposed by the district court constitutes cruel and unusual 

punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. However, the threshold 

 Case: 15-40495 Document: 00513344425 Page: 3 Date Filed: 01/15/2016
No. 15-40495

4

comparison between the gravity of his offense and the severity of his sentence 

does not reflect that the life sentence is grossly disproportionate. See United 

States v. Thomas, 627 F.3d 146, 160 (5th Cir. 2010). Accordingly, Ceja-Vargas 

has not shown plain error in regard to this constitutional claim. See United 

States v. Ebron, 683 F.3d 105, 155 (5th Cir. 2012). 

AFFIRMED. 

 Case: 15-40495 Document: 00513344425 Page: 4 Date Filed: 01/15/2016