United States v. Ken Lee Lam
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Appellant Ken Lee Lam (“Lam”) appeals his conviction and prison sentence of forty-one months. Following a jury trial, Lam was convicted of conspiracy to smuggle and to launder monetary instruments, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§§ 371, 545, and 1956(a)(2)(A), and of smuggling goods into the United States, in violation of § 545.
Lam claims that the district court erred by: (1) admitting hearsay documents on redirect; (2) not instructing the jury on the elements of money laundering; (3) imposing a two-level sentence enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. 2T3.1(b)(l); and (4) denying a two-level sentence reduction pursuant to U.S.S.G. 3B1.2(b). Lam also claims that (5) he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm as to all claims, except the *446 ineffective assistance of counsel claim, which we do not resolve in this appeal.
Lam claims for the first time on appeal that the district court erred by allowing the government to introduce, on redirect examination, documents containing hearsay statements. Because Lam did not object to the introduction of the documents at trial, we review for plain error.…