United States v. Tarl Brandon
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Tari Brandon appeals his convictions for Mail Fraud, Wire Fraud, Bank Fraud, and Conspiracy; Brandon also appeals his 168 month sentence, and the district court’s forfeiture and restitution orders. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm the conviction, sentence, and forfeiture order, and reverse and remand the restitution order.
The district court’s inadvertent provision to the jury of transcripts of recorded conversations not admitted into evidence was an error in the trial process, not an error in the trial framework resulting in structural error. See Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1, 8 , 119 S.Ct. 1827 , 144 L.Ed.2d 35 (1999); Eslaminia v. White, 136 F.3d 1234 , 1237 & n.1 (9th Cir.1998). The district court did not err by declining to conduct an evidentiary hearing and denying Brandon’s motion for a new trial based on this error. The evidence admitted at trial was overwhelming, including recorded conversations of Brandon describing the loan fraud schemes, and the extrinsic transcripts were either largely unintelligible or largely exculpatory. The extrinsic transcripts were thus unimportant in relation to the other material considered by the jury,…