based on facts found by the judge that were neither admitted by the defendant nor found by the jury. Booker, 543 U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. at 749-56, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). The Booker constitutional error is the use of extra-verdict enhancements to reach a Guidelines result that is binding on the sentencing judge. Mathenia, 409 F.3d at 1291. The Booker non-constitutional, or statutory, error occurs when the district court sentences a defendant under a mandatory sentencing scheme, even in the absence of a Sixth Amendment enhancement violation. Id. Because Taylor admitted the facts underlying the enhancement for obstruction of justice, no constitutional Booker error occurred when his sentence was enhanced based on those facts. See United States v. Shelton, 400 F.3d 1325, 1329-30 (11th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>). Although the district court did not engage in
holding that where the indictment charged drug quantity but drug quantity was not submitted to the jury the district court erred in using drug quantity to increase the penalty beyond the twentyyear maximum of  841b1c holding that if sentence does not exceed maximum authorized by facts admitted by defendant or found by jury there is no sixth amendment violation holding that there was no sixth amendment violation where judicial factfinding of a drug quantity greater than the amount alleged in the indictment did not go beyond the facts admitted by the defendant holding that the sixth amendment does not require factfinding by a jury for purposes of calculating the amount of restitution holding that there is no sixth amendment error when the sentence does not exceed the maximum authorized by facts the defendant admitted