by a prison term exceeding 20 years. See id. Instead, Brown’s procedural argument depends entirely on the success of his sufficiency of the evidence claim. As we explained above, the district court did not abuse its discretion by finding sufficient evidence to support Brown’s burglary with assault violation. Thus, the court did not err by calculating his guideline range using the Grade A classification. Accordingly, we affirm both the revocation of Brown’s supervised release and the sentence imposed for that violation. AFFIRMED. 1 . Brown only appeals the revocation of his supervised release with regard to the third violation of burglary with assault. Therefore, we need not consider the first two violations. See Timson v. Sampson, 518 F.3d 870, 874 (11th Cir.2008) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). 2 .Sometime after making her complaint,
holding that arguments not briefed are abandoned holding that issues not raised in the initial brief on appeal are deemed abandoned holding that issues not argued on appeal are deemed abandoned holding that issues not briefed on appeal are deemed abandoned holding issues raised in notice of appeal but not briefed are deemed waived