[DO NOT PUBLISH]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