United States v. Cristian Rodriguez-Lopez, 756 F.3d 422

Rodriguez–Lopez and Barron were convicted in the Eastern District of Texas of conspiring to distribute marijuana and were sentenced in separate proceedings.
Evidence linked Cavazos organization to cross-border marijuana trafficking; stash houses in Brookstown, Jamestown, and Charlestown were central to the conspiracy.
Rodriguez–Lopez allegedly lived in a stash house, was described as Roberto Marquez’s right hand, and was alleged to have moved thousands of pounds of marijuana.
Barron was linked to firearms trafficking for Cavazos, including straw purchases by Flores and multiple border deliveries to Cavazos associates.
The district court computed Rodriguez–Lopez’s offense level by attributing tens of thousands of kilograms of marijuana to him, and Barron’s by 1,000–3,000 kilograms plus a three-level managerial enhancement; both challenged on appeal.
On appeal, the court affirmed Rodriguez–Lopez’s conviction and Barron’s conviction, vacating Barron’s sentence and remanding for resentencing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Venue was proper in the ED Texas; waiver and pretrial challenge	Rodriguez–Lopez contends venue improper in ED Texas	Rodriguez–Lopez argues improper venue; Barron similarly challenged	Venue proper; challenge waived or, alternatively, supported as proper
Sufficiency of evidence to support conspiracy and quantity for Rodriguez–Lopez	Evidence insufficient to prove conspiracy or 1,000+ kg	Evidence shows active participation and substantial quantity	Sufficient evidence; jury properly found conspiracy and quantity
Sufficiency of Barron's knowledge/participation in conspiracy (aiding and abetting)	Barron aided and abetted conspiracy by supplying firearms and knowing illicit purpose	Evidence did not show Barron’s participation at requisite level	Evidence supports aiding and abetting conspiracy; conviction affirmed
Prosecutorial misconduct in Barron closing arguments	Prosecutor’s remarks were improper and prejudicial	Remarks deprived Barron of fair trial	Remarks improper but not enough to warrant new trial; no reversal
Barron’s sentencing enhancements: scope of quantity and supervisory role	district court properly applied 1B1.3/3B1.1 based on foreseeability and role	district court erred in quantity finding and in applying leadership enhancement	Quantity finding sustained; leadership enhancement improper; remand for resentencing

United States v. Winship, 724 F.2d 1116 (5th Cir. 1984) (venue in conspiracy cases; formation of agreement or overt act)
United States v. Carreon–Palacio, 267 F.3d 381 (5th Cir. 2001) (waiver and timing of venue challenges from trial to appeal)
United States v. Carbajal, 290 F.3d 277 (5th Cir. 2002) (notice of venue challenges; adequacy of acquittal motions)
United States v. Thomas, 690 F.3d 358 (5th Cir. 2012) (venue and standard for proving venue by preponderance)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (sufficiency review standard for evidence)
Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (U.S. 2000) (applies to drug quantity findings affecting sentences)
United States v. Mendoza, 226 F.3d 340 (5th Cir. 2000) (sufficiency and participate in conspiracy evidenced by actions)
United States v. Akins, 746 F.3d 590 (5th Cir. 2014) (Booker-era guidelines calculations and intermediate findings)
United States v. Tolliver, 61 F.3d 1189 (5th Cir. 1995) (supervisor/manager role considerations in guidelines)
Michelena–Orovio, 719 F.2d 738 (5th Cir. 1983) (illicit goods and seller knowledge in aiding conspiracy)
Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78 (U.S. 1935) (prosecutor conduct; permissible zeal vs foul blows)
United States v. Holmes, 413 F.3d 770 (8th Cir. 2005) (prosecutorial misconduct; need curative instructions)
United States v. Young, 470 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1985) (presumption against prosecutorial misconduct; government imprimatur)