71, 74 (2d Cir.2001) (per curiam) (same). In this case, although quantity was alleged in the defendants’ indictments, the District Court instructed the jury that it need not consider the quantity of drugs trafficked by the defendants. Therefore, because we are remanding this case for resentencing so that the District Court may consider “foreign drugs,” when recalculating the sentences the District Court must do so in accord with the principles of Apprendi. Thus, although the District Court may find, by a preponderance of the evidence standard, the quantity of drugs trafficked by the defendants and use this quantity in its calculations under the Sentencing Guidelines, the resulting sentence cannot exceed the statutory maximum. See United States v. Garcia, 240 F.3d 180, 183 (2d Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>). In this case, the statutory maximum for
holding that apprendi has not affected the district courts authority to determine facts for sentencing at or below the statutory maximum holding sentences need only be below the statutory maximum 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 apprendi does not apply where the defendant was sentenced to less than the statutory maximum holding that the sentence was reasonable in part because it was well below the statutory maximum