9 and 10 of the New Jersey Constitution, I would hold that when the finding of any fact triggers imposition of a minimum period of imprisonment a jury must find that fact beyond a reasonable doubt. Accordingly, I would hold unconstitutional on its face N.J.S.A. 2C:ll-5b(2), the statutory provision that sets forth the procedures by which the three-year mandatory minimum term at issue is imposed. I The right to trial by jury is “one of the most cherished rights in the long history of our Anglo-American jurisprudence.” State v. Ingenito, 87 N.J. 204, 210, 432 A.2d 912 (1981). It encompasses fundamental principles of fairness and due process that circumscribe a state’s power to punish criminal conduct. In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 364, 90 S.Ct. 1068, 1073, 25 L.Ed.2d 368, 375 (1970) (<HOLDING>); State v. Anderson, 127 N.J. 191, 200, 603
holding that no person shall suffer the onus of a criminal conviction except upon sufficient proof  defined as evidence necessary to convince a trier of fact beyond a reasonable doubt of the existence of every element of the offense holding under the due process clause of the fifth amendment and the notice and jury trial guarantees of the sixth amendment any fact other than prior conviction that increases the maximum penalty for a crime must be charged in an indictment submitted to a jury and proven beyond a reasonable doubt holding that conviction of a crime requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the crime holding that due process clause of fourteenth amendment protects the accused against conviction except upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the crime for which he is charged holding state must prove every element of an offense beyond a reasonable doubt and a scheme that shifts the burden of proof to the defendant by presuming a fact upon proof of the other elements of the offense violates due process