James Edward Hardy, Jr., pled guilty to possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2000), and was sentenced to a term of sixty-five months imprisonment. On appeal, he challenges the four-level enhancement he received for using the firearm in connection with another felony offense, U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2K2.1(b)(5) (2002), a fact not charged in the indictment. We affirm.

*231 Hardy contends that, under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 580 U.S. 466, 490, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), any fact that increases the sentencing guideline range must be charged in the indictment and proved beyond a reasonable doubt. However, Apprendi is not implicated when the sentencing court makes factual findings that increase the guideline range but the sentence does not exceed the statutory maximum. Harris v. United States, 536 U.S. 545, 122 S.Ct. 2406, 153 L.Ed.2d 524 (2002). In this case, the statutory maximum was ten years. We note that, although Hardy raised the legal issue at sentencing, he did not contest the fact that he used the gun to shoot another person.

Because the issue raised here lacks merit, we affirm the sentence imposed by the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.