USA v. Yves Daniel Besson

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
In the
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eleventh Circuit
____________________
No. 22-11603
Non-Argument Calendar
____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
YVES DANIEL BESSON,
a.k.a. Steve,
Defendant-Appellant.
____________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
D.C. Docket No. 1:19-cr-20633-CMA-3
USCA11 Case: 22-11603 Document: 29-1 Date Filed: 07/18/2023 Page: 1 of 5

-- 1 of 5 --

2 Opinion of the Court 22-11603
____________________
Before WILLIAM PRYOR , Chief Judge, and BRANCH and ANDERSON,
Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Yves Daniel Besson appeals his sentence of 120 months of
imprisonment following his plea of guilty to conspiring to import
five kilograms or more of cocaine into the United States. 21 U.S.C.
§§ 952(a), 963. Besson challenges the denial of safety-valve relief.
United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 5C1.2(a) (Nov.
2018). We affirm.
Besson admitted in his factual proffer that he conspired with
codefendants Joel Exume and Ricardo Fergile to import cocaine us-
ing paid couriers who carried multi-kilogram quantities of cocaine
on commercial flights to the United States. He admitted that, in
March 2018, he provided 2.6 kilograms of cocaine to a confidential
informant to import from Haiti to Ft. Lauderdale, where law en-
forcement seized the drugs. And he admitted that the drug-traffick-
ing organization was responsible for transporting between 5 and 15
kilograms of cocaine during the charged conspiracy.
Besson’s presentence investigation report provided a base
offense level of 30. Id. § 2D1.1(a)(5), (c)(5). The report recom-
mended granting a three-level reduction for acceptance of respon-
sibility, id. § 3E1.1, but denying safety-valve relief, id. § 5C1.2(a),
because Besson had not provided the government with a complete
and truthful statement about what he knew. The report provided
USCA11 Case: 22-11603 Document: 29-1 Date Filed: 07/18/2023 Page: 2 of 5

-- 2 of 5 --

22-11603 Opinion of the Court 3
extensive details of Besson’s offense conduct, including infor-
mation provided by the government that he had worked as a cou-
rier and recruiter for the drug-trafficking organization. Based on
Besson’s total offense level of 27 and a criminal history category of
I, the report provided an advisory guideline range of 70 to 87
months of imprisonment, which was increased to 120 months of
imprisonment because of the mandatory minimum, 21 U.S.C.
§ 960(b)(1)(B)(ii). Besson objected to the recommended denial of
safety-valve relief and the factual accuracy of the report.
At sentencing, the government argued that Besson was inel-
igible for the safety valve. It explained that prosecutors met with
him for over an hour before sentencing to give him a final oppor-
tunity to provide a full account of what happened during the course
of the conspiracy, but he “flatly lied” about his role in the conspir-
acy and contradicted his factual proffer by maintaining that he was
not involved in trafficking drugs. Based on this meeting, the gov-
ernment also objected that Besson should not receive a reduction
for acceptance of responsibility, U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1.
Besson’s counsel responded that he was disappointed that he
had not “been able to convince [Besson] to take advantage of the
safety valve” and that he believed Besson “fully understands the
ramifications of that.” In his allocution, Besson insisted that he told
the government everything he knew and that it “would have been
[his] pleasure to tell the truth in front of the [district court] if [he]
knew what [the government was] talking about.” He stated that he
was only a driver who transported people to the airport. He denied
USCA11 Case: 22-11603 Document: 29-1 Date Filed: 07/18/2023 Page: 3 of 5

-- 3 of 5 --

4 Opinion of the Court 22-11603
supplying a suitcase containing cocaine and explained that if “that
person that [he] took to the airport knew of what was going on,
then that’s that person.” He stated that he pleaded guilty only be-
cause there was video evidence of him in the car with the other
conspirators, but he did not know what they were doing and had
never “been involved in any organization.”
The district court sustained the government’s objection to
the acceptance-of-responsibility reduction, id. § 3E1.1, and ruled
that Besson was ineligible for safety-valve relief, id. § 5C1.2(a), be-
cause “as [his] attorney indicated in his earlier remarks, and as the
[g]overnment expressed,” he had not provided a truthful account
of everything that occurred. The district court explained that much
of what it had heard from Besson consisted of “denials and minimi-
zation of [his] conduct.” It sentenced Besson to the mandatory min-
imum sentence of 120 months of imprisonment.
The district court did not clearly err by denying Besson
safety-valve relief. See United States v. Tigua, 963 F.3d 1138, 1141
(11th Cir. 2020). To qualify for the safety valve, a defendant must
“truthfully provide[] to the Government all information and evi-
dence [he] has concerning the offense or offenses that were part of
the same course of conduct or of a common scheme or plan . . . .”
U.S.S.G. § 5C1.2(a)(5). The record supports the findings of the dis-
trict court that Besson had not provided the government with a
truthful account of everything that occurred. At sentencing, Besson
denied knowing anything about the drug-trafficking conspiracy or
its members, which contradicted his admissions in his factual
USCA11 Case: 22-11603 Document: 29-1 Date Filed: 07/18/2023 Page: 4 of 5

-- 4 of 5 --

22-11603 Opinion of the Court 5
proffer that he was a member of the same conspiracy and had pro-
vided several kilograms of cocaine to a paid courier to import to
the United States. And even though the government provided ad-
ditional reasons to discredit Besson’s story—including testimony
from Antoine Lubin who identified and implicated Besson in the
conspiracy while testifying at codefendant Fergile’s trial—Besson’s
“denials and minimization” of his previously-admitted conduct was
sufficient to establish that he had not satisfied the “tell-all” require-
ment to obtain safety-valve relief. See United States v. Johnson, 375
F.3d 1300, 1302 (11th Cir. 2004).
We AFFIRM Besson’s sentence.
USCA11 Case: 22-11603 Document: 29-1 Date Filed: 07/18/2023 Page: 5 of 5

-- 5 of 5 --