Did the lower courts err when they imposed and affirmed Mr. Malone's sentence based on overreliance on his Criminal-History?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Petitioner Robert Malone was convicted after a jury trial for violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (conspiracy “to distribute 500 grams or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine”) (Count ss1); 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (possession “with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine”) (Count ss2). While there was an ostensible ‘quantity’ finding by the jury in a special verdict form, the District Court omitted critical instruction on how the jury was to actually determine the quantity. At sentencing both the prosecutor and the court focused almost exclusively on Mr. Malone’s Criminal History to determine that he was not entitled to the mandatory minimum. 1.) Did the lower courts err when they imposed and affirmed Mr. Malone’s sentence based on overreliance on his Criminal History? , 2.) Is Mr. Malone’s judgment void because the District Court removed the element of drug quantity from the jury by failing to instruct on the meaning of “mixture or substance . containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine”? 3.) | Where multiple additional errors affected petitioner’s conviction and/or sentence in the courts below, should this Court exercise it’s supervisory power to vacate his conviction and sentence? i i ua