that Ruiz’s offense involved at least 100 grams of heroin and that the statutory minimum therefore applied, the district court could still have sentenced Ruiz to 10 years in prison. Had the court found that Ruiz’s offense involved only the .632 gram of heroin that she personally delivered to the undercover officer, Ruiz would have been sentenced under § 841(b)(1)(C). This statute providés a maximum sentence of 30 years for defendants who, like Ruiz, have at least one prior felony drug conviction. Because the 10-year sentence imposed by the district court is well below the maximum sentence to which Ruiz would otherwise have been subject, the district court did not plainly err in sentencing her to 10 years imprisonment. United States v. Brunson, 915 F.2d 942, 944 (5th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>). Ruiz’s second argument, that the district
holding that where the guideline range is higher than the statutory maximum sentence the court should depart from the lowest range that could support the statutory maximum holding that a motion under  5k11 permitted a downward departure from the guideline range but that the departure could not extend below the statutory minimum sentence absent an additional motion by the government under  3553e holding district court correctly reversed a departure sentence where the trial court failed to provide written reasons for the departure holding that misapplication of career offender enhancement in light of intervening case law not a miscarriage of justice because guideline range still within statutory maximum authorized holding that where district court failed to articulate reasons for upward departure from guideline range but could upon remand reinstate the same sentence because it fell below statutory maximum no miscarriage of justice amounting to plain error had occurred