that, under the plain languáge of § 34, a life sentence may not be imposed absent jury direction. This was the conclusion of the Fifth Circuit in United States v. Williams, 775 F.2d 1295, 1299 (5th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1089, 106 S.Ct. 1477, 89 L.Ed.2d 732 (1986): The district court is without power to impose a life sentence_ Here, ... under the clear meaning of the combination of sections 844(i) and 34, Williams may be sentenced by the district court only to “any term of years” and not to life imprisonment in the absence of a jury recommendation or jury waiver_ Absent the recommendation of the jury, this sentence was improper and must be vacated and the cause remanded to the district court for resentencing. See also United States v. Hansen, 755 F.2d 629, 631 (8th Cir.) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 834, 106 S.Ct. 105, 88
holding that 18 usc  1959a1 which provides for a punishment of death or life imprisonment or a fine under this title or both id emphases added provides a mandatory minimum sentence of life imprisonment holding that a statute providing for interlocutory appeals to be heard in the court where appellate jurisdiction may be vested by law means that this court has appellate jurisdiction over interlocutory appeals in cases where the sentence of life imprisonment or death may be imposed recognizing that before the case was submitted to the jury the trial court charged the jury that if it were unable to reach a unanimous recommendation the court would impose a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole holding discretion of district court for sentencing is explicitly limited in this case by the statute which provides that life imprisonment may be imposed only if death results from the defendants actions and if the jury directs the imposition of the sentence holding that sentencing error is harmless if the error did not affect the district courts selection of the sentence imposed