beyond a reasonable doubt.” We hold that Apprendi is not implicated, in this case so there can be no Apprendi error. The district court sentenced Van-horn to a term of 60 months of imprisonment on the mail fraud counts, which is the statutorily authorized maximum sentence permitted under 18 U.S.C. § 1841, regardless of the amount of loss. On the money laundering counts, the district court imposed a concurrent sentence of 71 months, which is well within the 20-year maximum sentence authorized by 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(1)(B), without reference to the amount of loss. Where a defendant’s sentence does not exceed the statutorily authorized maximum sentence for the crime, the case does not implicate the principle announced in Apprendi. United States v. McIntosh, 236 F.3d 968, 976 (8th Cir.) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1022, 121 S.Ct. 1964,
holding that for purposes of apprendi the statutory maximum is the maximum sentence that may be imposed based solely on the jurys findings holding that a defendant could not assert an error under apprendi v new jersey because his sentence does not exceed the statutory maximum holding that there is no sixth amendment error when the sentence does not exceed the maximum authorized by facts the defendant admitted holding apprendi is not implicated where sentence does not exceed statutory maximum sentence authorized for the offense in its simplest form holding apprendi is not implicated by an application of the sentencing guidelines that increases the sentencing range so long as the sentence imposed does not exceed the statutory maximum