is well below the 20 year statutory maximum sentence authorized without the jury’s drug quantity findings. § 841(b)(1)(C). We have held that “Apprendi is not triggered where the defendant receives a term of imprisonment within the statutory maximum that would have applied even without the enhancing factor (such as the drug amount).” Burns, 298 F.3d at 544. In Bums, we held that Apprendi was not violated when the district court failed to require the jury to determine, beyond a reasonable doubt, the amount of crack cocaine for which the defendants were responsible because the sentence imposed on each defendant was below the twenty year sentence authorized by 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(C). Id. (referring to defendants A. Harden, J. Harden, and Jordon); accord Serrano-Lopez, 366 F.3d at 638 (<HOLDING>); see also United States v. Zidell, 323 F.3d
holding that statutory maximum is twenty years when drug quantity is not charged as element of offense and found by jury beyond a reasonable doubt holding apprendi inapplicable in heroin trafficking prosecution even though drug quantity not determined by the jury because district court sentenced defendant within the statutory maximum 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 restitution in the full amount of each victims losses does not exceed the statutory maximum holding that when a defendant is sentenced to a term that does not exceed the statutory maximum allowed for an indeterminate amount of the drug involved the jurys determination of drug quantity is practically irrelevant