Kimball

MEMORANDUM *

Allen Andy Kimball appeals the 300-month sentence imposed by the district court after he pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute and distribution of crystal methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 ; money laundering in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1956 (a)(1)(B)(i) and 2; and conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956 (a)(1)(A)(i) and (h), and 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1) and 846. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (a), and we affirm.

I.

We reject Kimball’s argument that the district court violated the Sixth Amendment when it determined the drug quantity and enhanced his sentence based upon judge-found facts. There was no *6 constitutional violation because the district court’s findings did not expose Kimball to a higher statutory maximum sentence than that authorized by his guilty plea. See United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1077-78 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). Kimball incorrectly interprets United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 , 125 S.Ct. 738 , 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), to hold that the “statutory maximum” refers to the upper limit of the Guidelines sentencing range. The statutory maximum…