Question 1: May a state legislature require a state court to increase a criminal defendant's sentencing exposure based on judicial fact-finding by preponderance of the evidence when those facts are beyond "the fact of a prior conviction " but determined by that state's appellate courts to be "derivative of' or "related to" the fact of a prior conviction?

Question 2: Is judicial fact-finding by a preponderance of the evidence that a defendant qualifies for an increased and mandatory sentence of life without parole pursuant to section 775.082(9), Florida Statutes, the state's Prison Releasee Reoffender Punishment Act, based on facts not admitted to by the defendant or proven beyond a reason doubt subject to harmless error?

Whether the lower court erred in its interpretation and application of the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause