Can a court send a case to the jury when the evidence is only sufficient to give them a choice between probabilities instead of being sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Petitioner Mantell Alabi Stevens was convicted of offenses relating to a death allegedly caused by fentanyl-laced heroin. Stevens did not sell directly to the decedent; instead, the decedent received the fatal substance from an individual who had purchased heroin from Stevens and had cut the heroin with another substance. Despite changes in the amount and color of the heroin as it moved from Stevens to another to the decedent, Stevens was held responsible for the death. Then the sentencing court effectively added more than a decade to Stevens’s sentence based on a decade old conviction for possession of a controlled substance. The questions presented are thus: 1. Can a court send a case to the jury when the evidence is only sufficient to give them a choice between probabilities instead of being sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? 2. Can a court increase a base offense level by deeming controlled substance offenses similar even when one is a distribution offense and the other is for mere possession? PARTIES TO PROCEEDINGS Mantell Alabi Stevens and the United States of America are the only parties to this proceeding and the proceedings before the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. In addition to Stevens and the United States, Ashley Nicole Markham was a party to the proceedings before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky.