Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Yolanda LOPEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-04-19
Citations: 177 F. App'x 681
Docket Number: No. 05-50544
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Yolanda LOPEZ, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before: PREGERSON, LEAVY, Circuit Judges, and BEISTLINE, District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 177
Pages: 681–681

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Yolanda LOPEZ, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 05-50544.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 6, 2006.
Filed April 19, 2006.
Stacey H. Sullivan, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Mary Fan, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Michael Petrick, Jr., Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: PREGERSON, LEAVY, Circuit Judges, and BEISTLINE, District Judge.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
The Honorable Ralph R. Beistline, United States District Judge for the District of Alaska, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
The facts of this case are known to the parties.
We conclude, and the Government concedes, that portions of the case agent's testimony violated Lopez's Sixth Amendment rights to confrontation and cross-examination. However, given the overwhelming independent evidence of Lopez's guilt, including her detailed videotaped admissions which were played to the jury, we find that the error was harmless. See United States v. Allen, 425 F.3d 1231, 1235 (9th Cir.2005) ("Confrontation Clause violations are . subject to harmless error analysis.").
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.