If there was Blakely-Cunningham error, is it harmless beyond a reasonable doubt?

In any event, we are also able to conclude that if there was Blakely-Cunningham error, it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Sandoval held that error of this nature is subject to the harmless error test of Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18. Within the context of Sandoval, where there had been a jury trial, the court framed the appropriate analysis as follows: "[W]e must determine whether, if the question of the existence of an aggravating circumstance or circumstances had been submitted to the jury, the jury's verdict would have authorized the upper term sentence. . . . [I]f a reviewing court concludes, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the jury, applying the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard, unquestionably would have found true at least a single aggravating circumstance had it been submitted to the jury, the Sixth Amendment error properly may be found harmless." (Sandoval, supra, 41 Cal.4th at pp. 838-839.)