[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
FILED
________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
October 14, 2005
No. 05-11720
THOMAS K. KAHN
Non-Argument Calendar CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 04-00069-CR-WS
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
TONY O'NEAL LLOYD,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Alabama
_________________________
(October 14, 2005)
Before HULL, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Tony O’Neal Lloyd appeals his sentence of 120 months of imprisonment
based on his conviction for possession of a firearm as a felon. 18 U.S.C. §
922(g)(1). Lloyd argues that because he committed his crime after Blakely v.
Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004), but before United States v.
Booker, 543 U.S. —, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005), the district court violated his rights
under the ex post facto principle of fair warning in the Due Process Clause when it
enhanced his sentence based on post-verdict findings of fact and retroactively
applied the sentencing guidelines as advisory. Because, as Lloyd concedes, we
have rejected this argument, United States v. Duncan, 400 F.3d 1297 (11th Cir.
2005), and “only the Supreme Court or this Court sitting en banc can judicially
overrule a prior panel decision,” United States v. Marte, 356 F.3d 1336, 1344 (11th
Cir. 2004), we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
2