PER CURIAM: ^[*]

Lee Hobdy pleaded guilty of being a convicted felon in possession of a *2 Case: 16-10357 Document: 00514062087 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/06/2017

No. 16-10357

firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § § 922(g)(1) and 924(e) and was sentenced to 46 months of imprisonment and a two-year term of supervised release. He challenges the calculation of his guidelines range under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(4)(A), which states that the base offense level is 20 if the offense occurred after a felony conviction for a crime of violence (“COV”).

Hobdy avers that his Texas robbery conviction no longer qualifies as a COV because the former residual clause and accompanying commentary of U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a)(2) are invalid in light of Johnson v. United States , 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015). That argument is unavailing, see Beckles v. United States , 137 S. Ct. 886, 892 (2017), and Texas robbery qualifies as an enumer- ated COV under the former commentary to § 4B1.2. See United States v. Flores-Vasquez , 641 F.3d 667, 670 n.1 (5th Cir. 2011); United States v. Santiesteban-Hernandez , 469 F.3d 376, 380–81 (5th Cir. 2006), overruled on other grounds by United States v. Rodriguez , 711 F.3d 541, 547–63 (5th Cir. 2013) (en banc). We need not address Hobdy’s argument that Texas robbery does not constitute a COV under § 4B1.2 because it lacks the element of use, threatened use, or attempted use of force. See United States v. Olalde- Hernandez , 630 F.3d 372, 376 (5th Cir. 2011).

AFFIRMED.

2

[*] Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.