context: Thus, the district court did not calculate drug quantity in order to apply a mandatory minimum, but only to calculate the Sentencing Guidelines that applied with no mandatory minimum. The latter calculation does not implicate Apprendi.
citation_a.signal: cf.
citation_a.identifier: 133 S.Ct. 2155, 2155
citation_a.parenthetical: requiring any fact that increases statutory minimum to be submitted to jury
citation_a.sentence: See United States v. McLeod, 251 F.3d 78, 82 (2d Cir.2001) (“Apprendi is inapplicable to Guidelines calculations that do not result in a sentence on a single count above the statutory maximum for that count.”); cf. Alleyne v. United States, 133 S.Ct. at 2155 (requiring any fact that increases statutory minimum to be submitted to jury). Accordingly, we identify no Apprendi error here, let alone plain error.
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 251 F.3d 78, 82
citation_b.parenthetical: "Apprendi is inapplicable to Guidelines calculations that do not result in a sentence on a single count above the statutory maximum for that count."
citation_b.sentence: See United States v. McLeod, 251 F.3d 78, 82 (2d Cir.2001) (“Apprendi is inapplicable to Guidelines calculations that do not result in a sentence on a single count above the statutory maximum for that count.”); cf. Alleyne v. United States, 133 S.Ct. at 2155 (requiring any fact that increases statutory minimum to be submitted to jury). Accordingly, we identify no Apprendi error here, let alone plain error.