With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” United States v. Duarte, 246 F.3d 56, 60 (1st Cir.2001). We find no plain error here. Our conclusion rests on two bases. The first involves timing. The district court sentenced Pacheco on November 26, 2002. That was almost nineteen months before the Supreme Court decided Blakely. Circuit precedent in force at the time of Pacheco’s sentencing, in line with the Supreme Court’s decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), provided that an aggravating sentencing factor did not need to be presented to a jury or proven beyond a reasonable doubt so long as the resulting sentence did not exceed the statutory maximum. See United States v. Caba, 241 F.3d 98, 101 (1st Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>). Here, the underlying offense carries a

A: recognizing that where there are other persons who are criminally responsible for the offense who have not been apprehended or have not been charged due to cooperation a sole defendant may be eligible for an upward or downward adjustment for role in the offense
B: holding appeal of enhancement under ussg  3allb waived because it was an adjustment rather than an upward departure 
C: holding that within these parameters apprendi permits an upward adjustment for a defendants role in a drugtrafficking conspiracy
D: holding that a conspiracy claim must contain supportive factual allegations describing the general composition of the conspiracy some or all of its broad objectives and the defendants general role in the conspiracy
C.