Whether a trial court may use acquitted conduct by a jury that rejected the State's proof on a particular issue in order to enhance a defendant's sentence on a separate or lesser-included offense?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED The Sixth Amendment guarantees a defendant the right to a trial by an impartial jury to have his or her guilt proven beyond a reasonable doubt. This Court reaffirmed the principle in Alleyne v. United States, 133 S.Ct. 2151 (2013) that any facts that increase either the mandatory minimum or maximum sentence must be submitted to ajury. In spite of this well recognized principle, courts across the country use acquitted conduct to enhance a sentence for a separate or lesser included offense thereby negating the jury’s verdict of not guilty which specifically rejected the theory of the State and the evidence associated with that theory. Thus, the questions presented here are: (1) Whether a trial court may use acquitted conduct by a jury that rejected the State’s proof on a particular issue in order to enhance a defendant’s sentence on a separate or lesser-included offense? (2) Whether a trial court may use that same acquitted conduct by a jury to support a conviction for a separate or lesser included offense? i