UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-4021

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

LUIS RENTERIA,

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)

Submitted: December 12, 2016 Decided: December 16, 2016

Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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. 

Fritz, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North 

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

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 

applied the cross-reference for first degree murder, U.S. 

Sentencing Guidelines Manual §§ 2D1.1(d)(1), 2A1.1 (2014), and 

sentenced Renteria to life in prison. Renteria appeals, 

claiming that the district court erred when it applied the 

cross-reference. We affirm.

When evaluating Guidelines calculations, we review the 

district court’s legal conclusions de novo and its factual 

findings for clear error. United States v. Cox, 744 F.3d 305, 

308 (4th Cir. 2014). The Guidelines provide, “[i]f a victim was 

killed under circumstances that would constitute murder under 18 

U.S.C. § 1111 had such killing taken place within the 

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 

Government must prove the facts supporting application of a 

cross-reference by a preponderance of the evidence. United 

States v. Davis, 679 F.3d 177, 182 (4th Cir. 2012).

When attributing the actions of co-conspirators for 

sentencing purposes, the Guidelines provide for consideration, 
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). “In 

order to determine the defendant’s accountability for the 

conduct of others under subsection (a)(1)(B), the court must 

first determine the scope of the criminal activity the 

particular defendant agreed to jointly undertake.” Id. cmt. 

(n.2). 

We hold that the district court did not err in applying the 

cross-reference. 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. 

We therefore affirm. We dispense with oral argument 

because the facts and legal arguments are adequately presented 

in the materials before this court and argument would not aid 

the decisional process.

AFFIRMED