Opinion
CRIMINAL NO. 7:12-CR-37-FA-10
12-11-2015
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. LUIS RENTERIA
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the court is the applicability of the cross reference contained at United States Sentencing Guideline ("USSG") § 2D1.1(d)(1) to the sentencing of defendant Luis Renteria. USSG § 2D1.1(d)(1) provides that if a victim was killed under circumstances that would constitute murder under 18 U.S.C. § 1111 the sentencing court should apply the first degree murder guideline found at USSG § 2A1.1. For reasons expressed more fully below, the court has determined that the cross reference at USSG § 2D1.1(d)(1) should be utilized in this case.
Analysis
USSG § 2D1.1(d)(1) provides that "[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, apply § 2A1.1 (First Degree Murder) or § 2A1.2 (Second Degree Murder), as appropriate, if the resulting offense level is greater than that determined under this guideline." A court should apply the first degree murder cross reference in cases of premeditated killing. USSG § 2A1.1, App. Note 1; see also United States v. Abdullah, 2007 WL 2046801, *4 (4th Cir. 2007).
A court's "factual findings supporting the applicability of the murder cross reference" is reviewed for clear error. Abdullah, 2007 WL 2046801 at *4; United States v. Crump, 120 F.3d 462, 467-68 (4th Cir. 1997). "If the district court's findings 'may rationally be said to be supported by a preponderance of the evidence, they may not be disturbed on appeal.'" Abdullah, 2007 WL 2046801 at *4 (quoting Crump, 120 F.3d at 468).
The court has applied a preponderance of the evidence standard in making the following findings.
The facts and evidence relating to the murder cross-reference are as follows:
On January 25, 2012, Esteban Rodriguez-Jasso contacted Reynaldo Calderon to inquire about his interest in conducting a kidnapping in exchange for $10,000. Rodriguez-Jasso told Calderon that the person who was to be kidnapped, Geniro Jamis, had stolen $150,000 in drug money from Jamis's brother-in-law and that the brother-in-law was willing to pay to have Jamis kidnapped and tortured until he revealed the location of the money.
Calderon testified at length at Luis Renteria's sentencing, relating in detail how the kidnapping took place, the methods used to torture Jamis in an effort to find where the stolen drug proceeds were hidden, and how Jamis's brother-in-law arranged to pay an additional $5,000 to have Jamis murdered. Calderon testified that he spoke with the brother-in-law by telephone and met with him on the night of the murder to collect the initial payment of $10,000 and again the next day to receive the additional $5,000. Calderon, at Renteria's original sentencing hearing, identified Luis Renteria as the brother-in-law who arranged to have Jamis kidnapped and murdered and pay Calderon and his accomplices the money for their crime.
The court finds Calderon to be credible and reliable. While he was testifying under a plea agreement with the government and obviously hoped to obtain a motion for substantial assistance, his testimony was corroborated in several particulars which the court summarizes as follows:
First, Israel Renteria Aguirre, the victim's son, was abducted along with his father and later released. Aguirre testified that one of the six abductors referred to him and his father as "thieves," an apparent reference to theft of the drug money. Aguirre testified that his family, including the victim, had been living with Renteria and his family and that Renteria had kicked them out of his house "because he said we had stolen some money from him." Aguirre also witnessed an emotional argument between Renteria and Jamis during which Renteria demanded return of the stolen money. The argument took place at a store in Goldsboro, North Carolina, and became so heated that they were asked to leave the store. Aguirre's testimony establishes that Renteria believed Jamis owed him money and was seeking to recover it -- a motive for the abduction and subsequent murder. It is clear that the person who paid for Jamis's murder was identified as Jamis's brother-in-law. The only brother-in-law identified by the evidence who had motive or means to commit the crime was Renteria.
The witness Kodi Hawkins, a convicted drug dealer, testified to a prior relationship with Renteria's daughter Monica, and said that Monica told him that her uncle, Jamis, had stolen $200,000 in drug proceeds from her and her family. Monica was involved in drug dealing with her father who made arrangements for her to supply Hawkins and another witness, McKinley Fogg, with cocaine. Renteria was involved in collecting proceeds of Monica's drug dealings. He also recovered drug proceeds stolen from Monica by an associate of Hawkins.
In February, 2012, an ATF informant recorded a conversation with Reynaldo Calderon that took place some two weeks after Jamis's murder. During the recorded conversation Calderon said: "The guy we let go [Aguirre] is the nephew of the man that paid us . . . The guy that stole the 150, man, was the brother-in-law of the man." Calderon, in the same conversation, referred to Aguirre's uncle and said: "[H]is uncle's the one that paid, the guy we let go . . . He is the nephew of the man that sent us to do the job."
Lazaro Sanchez-Martinez testified that he was incarcerated with Renteria at the Pitt County jail where, during a private conversation following a prayer service, Renteria said that he regretted having his brother-in-law killed.
Based on all of this, and the demeanor and detailed knowledge about the crimes Calderon demonstrated on the witness stand, the court finds him credible and has no sound reason to doubt the accuracy of Calderon's in-court identification of Renteria as the man who paid for the murder.
The court further notes that, while none of Reynaldo Calderon's accomplices were called to testify at Renteria's sentencing hearing, ATF Special Agent Eddie Eubanks testified that he participated in the debriefing of the accomplices and their stories corroborated Reynaldo Calderon with regard to "the main facts of what took place . . . ."
Renteria's wife, Alicia Gonzalez-Garcia, provided an alibi for Renteria at the sentencing hearing, and insisted that Renteria was home with her at the time he was alleged to have met with Reynaldo Calderon and his accomplices on the night of the murder. The court did not believe, and does not credit, this testimony. Alicia had an obvious motive to lie to protect her husband. She also testified that she had no knowledge or awareness that her husband was a drug dealer. The court finds this testimony to be an obvious falsehood. Other evidence established not only that Alicia was aware of her family's drug dealing but was, at times, an active participant. Accordingly, the court discredits Alicia's testimony in all relevant particulars.
Renteria has made several arguments in an effort to discredit the evidence that supports application of the murder cross-reference. The court finds these arguments unconvincing.
Renteria argues that the absence of telephone records that would have corroborated portions of Calderon's testimony suggest the calls did not take place. While such evidence might have been helpful to the government, the court does not believe that the absence of such evidence is sufficient to discredit Calderon's testimony which the court has found to be credible and believable and corroborated by other evidence as discussed above.
On September 28, 2013, Calderon failed to recognize a photograph of Renteria as the man who paid for Jamis's murder. His identification of Renteria at trial was positive and definite, however, and entitled to be believed based on corroborating evidence in this case. There is no other candidate for the man who paid for this murder besides Renteria.
Likewise, the court finds unconvincing the several additional arguments discussed in memoranda filed by the defendant, that were designed to impeach and discredit testimony of the government's witnesses.
The court believes and concludes that the evidence, taken as a whole, establishes by a preponderance that Renteria arranged and paid for the murder of Geniro Jamis. The first degree murder cross reference will therefore be applied.
The Clerk is directed to forward a copy of this Memorandum Opinion to counsel of record, the United States Marshal for the Eastern District of North Carolina, and the Probation Department of this court.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 11th day of December, 2015.
ENTER:
/s/_________
David A. Faber
Senior United States District Judge