USA v. Daniel Szabo

Filing

Opinion issued by court as to Appellant Daniel Michael Szabo. Decision: Affirmed. Opinion type: Non-Published. Opinion method: Per Curiam. The opinion is also available through the Court's Opinions page at this link http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions.

Case: 16-13582

Date Filed: 01/09/2017

Page: 1 of 3

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 16-13582
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 4:15-cr-10014-JEM-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
DANIEL MICHAEL SZABO,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(January 9, 2017)
Before WILLIAM PRYOR, JULIE CARNES and JILL PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Daniel Szabo appeals his sentence of 27 months of imprisonment for failing
to obey an order from the Coast Guard to heave to his vessel. 18 U.S.C.

Case: 16-13582

Date Filed: 01/09/2017

Page: 2 of 3

§ 2237(a)(1). Szabo argues that his sentence is procedurally unreasonable because
the district court denied his request for a two-level reduction of his offense level
for acceptance of responsibility. See United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual
§ 3E1.1(a) (Nov. 2015). We affirm.
The district court did not clearly err by finding that Szabo had not accepted
responsibility for his offense. Szabo offered to plead guilty to failing to heave to
his vessel, but in so doing he refused to recognize that his conduct was unlawful, to
express any “remorse or contrition” for his wrongdoing, see United States v.
Rodriguez, 959 F.2d 193, 195 (11th Cir. 1992), or to disclose all of the misdeeds
for which he was accountable, see U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1 cmt. n.1(A). Szabo repeatedly
disregarded marine officers’ orders to heave to and endangered them and other
boaters. Szabo, who was inebriated, led the officers on a high-speed chase through
populated waterways; fired his gun multiple times at the officers; sped toward their
vessel while daring them to veer away; rammed their vessel with his dinghy;
insulted the officers by calling them “water pigs”; and boasted that he could not be
caught unless shot in the forehead. Eventually, Szabo collided with the Coast
Guard vessel. The officers arrested Szabo after subduing him with pepper spray.
Szabo testified and disavowed virtually any memory of the incident. The district
court, which enjoyed “a unique position to evaluate” Szabo, discredited his
testimony. See U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1 cmt. n.5. “[W]e are [not] left with the definite and
2

Case: 16-13582

Date Filed: 01/09/2017

Page: 3 of 3

firm conviction that a mistake has been committed” by denying Szabo a reduction
for acceptance of responsibility. See Crystal Entm’t & Filmworks, Inc. v. Jurado,
643 F.3d 1313, 1320 (11th Cir. 2011) (internal quotation marks and citation
omitted). Szabo’s sentence is procedurally reasonable.
We AFFIRM Szabo’s sentence.

3