of the Sentencing Guidelines to the facts de novo.” Caraballo, 595 F.3d at 1230. The district court properly applied a two-level enhancement because “the offense involved intentionally or recklessly creating a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury to another person.” U.S.S.G. § 2Ll.l(b)(6); id. cmt. n. 5 (“Reckless conduct to which the adjustment from subsection (b)(6) applies includes ... carrying substantially more passengers than the rated capacity of a motor vehicle or vessel....”). Watson piloted an overcrowded vessel at- a high rate of speed, at night, without any navigational lights on, and then attempted to evade the Coast Guard. That conduct is sufficient to warrant the two-level enhancement. See United States v. Gonzalez, 394 Fed.Appx. 570, 575 (11th Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Fuentes-Nodarse, 606
holding that trial court did not err holding that district court did not err in giving an instruction identical to that proposed by jenkins holding that district court did not clearly err in giving twolevel enhancement for similar conduct holding that district court did not err in finding that similar scheme involved sophisticated means holding that district court did not clearly err in declining to credit prisoners testimony about exhaustion