
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Shawn Edward WILLIAMS, a.k.a. Sean Williams, a.k.a. Shaun E. Williams, a.k.a. Shaun Williams, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 10-14877
    Non-Argument Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    Aug. 18, 2011.
    Linda Julin McNamara, Robert E. O’Neill, David Paul Rhodes, Eduardo E. Toro-Font, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Tampa, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Rosemary T. Cakmis, Donna Lee Elm, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Orlando, FL, Dionja L. Dyer, A. Fitzgerald Hall, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Tampa, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before CARNES, MARTIN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Shawn Williams appeals his 188-month total sentence for being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(e)(1), and possession of an unregistered firearm, in violation of 26 U.S.C. §§ 5841, 5861(d), and 5871. On appeal, Williams’ sole contention is that the district court erred in concluding that his prior Florida conviction for resisting an officer with violence constituted a predicate “violent felony” for purposes of applying the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) (ACCA). That contention is foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Nix, 628 F.3d 1341, 1342 (11th Cir.2010), which is directly on point going the other way.

Williams’ argument that the Supreme Court’s decision in Sykes v. United States, — U.S.-, 131 S.Ct. 2267, 180 L.Ed.2d 60 (2011), overruled our Nix decision is unpersuasive. In the Sykes case, the Supreme Court held that the Indiana crime of knowing and intentional flight from a law enforcement officer was indeed a “violent felony” for ACCA purposes. That holding is entirely consistent with our holding in Nix that a Florida conviction for resisting an officer is a “violent felony” for ACCA purposes.

AFFIRMED.  