Is a federal court's failure to instruct the jury on an element of a sentence enhancement provision a federal constitutional error?

"[A] trial court's failure to instruct the jury on an element of a sentence enhancement provision (other than one based on a prior conviction), is federal constitutional error if the provision 'increases the penalty for [the underlying] crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum.'" (People v. Sengpadychith (2001) 26 Cal.4th 316, 326.) Such instructional errors mandate a reversal "unless it can be shown 'beyond a reasonable doubt' that the error did not contribute to the jury's verdict." (Ibid.) That is, the "reviewing court [must] conclude[ ] beyond a reasonable doubt that the omitted element was uncontested and supported by overwhelming evidence, such that the jury verdict would have been the same absent the error." (Neder v. United States (1999) 527 U.S. 1, 17.)