Should the reasoning of Apprendi, Alleyne, and Peugh be extended to cases where a defendant's sentencing guideline range increases significantly due to a fact not proved at trial?

QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW 1. Should this Honorable Court extend the reasoning of Apprendi, Alleyne, and Peugh to cases where a defendant's sentencing guideline range increases significantly as a result of a fact that is not proved at trial? Specifically, where the fact that heroin contained fentanyl was not proved to the jury but was applied in sentence guideline calculations to increase defendant's range from 77-96 months to 135-168 months, were defendant's rights under the 5th and 6t amendment violated? 1