Glenton Peterkin argues that the district court erred by using two Florida convictions to enhance his sentence for being a career offender under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2. But the arguments are squarely foreclosed by this Court’s prior published opinions. Mr. Peterkin’s career offender enhancement is unaffected by the Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v. United States, — U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 2551, 192 L.Ed.2d 569 (2015), because vagueness principles do not apply to the advisory Sentencing Guidelines. See Beckles v. United States, — U.S. -, 137 S.Ct. 886, 890, 197 L.Ed.2d 145 (2017); United States v. Matchett, 802 F.3d 1185, 1190 (11th Cir. 2015). And his Florida convictions that supported the enhancement—for robbery (Fla. Stat. § 812.13(1)) and aggravated assault (Fla. Stat. § 784.021)—remain qualifying predicates under § 4B1.2. See United States v. Lockley, 632 F.3d 1238, 1240-46 (11th Cir. 2011) (robbery conviction under § 812.13(1) qualifies as crime of violence); Turner v. Warden Coleman FCI (Medium), 709 F.3d 1328, 1332 (11th Cir. 2013) (aggravated assault conviction under § 784.021 qualifies as crime of violence).

AFFIRMED.