Ana Villanueva-Alvarado appeals the sentence imposed following her guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to transport and harbor undocumented aliens for the purpose of financial gain in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A) and (B). She argues that the district court clearly erred in enhancing her offense level pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.1(b)(5)(B) because one of her co-conspirators brandished a weapon during the offense. She argues that she was unaware that any of her co-conspirators possessed a weapon and that it was not foreseeable to her that one of them would brandish a weapon during the offense.

We review the district court’s application of the Sentencing Guidelines de novo and its findings of fact for clear error. See United States v. Cisneros-Gutierrez, 517 F.3d 751, 764 (5th Cir. 2008); United States v. Charon, 442 F.3d 881, 887 (5th Cir.), cert denied, 549 U.S. 915, 127 S.Ct. 260, 166 L.Ed.2d 202 (2006). Although there was no direct evidence that Villanueva-Alvarado knew one of her co-conspirators possessed and brandished a weapon during the course of the offense, the evidence supported the distinct court’s finding that the brandishing of a weapon by one of her co-conspirators was reasonably foreseeable to her. Accordingly, the district court did not clearly err when it enhanced Villanueva-Alvarado’s offense level pursuant to § 2Ll.l(b)(5)(B). Moreover, because Villanueva-Alvarado was sentenced within the recommended guidelines range, her sentence is presumptively reasonable. See Gall v. United States, — U.S.-, 128 S.Ct. 586, 597, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 554 (5th Cir. 2006). The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.