Perez

MEMORANDUM *

Anthony James Perez appeals his conviction for the crimes of felon in possession of a firearm and felon in possession of ammunition. See 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g)(1). He alleges that a number of errors combined to deprive him of a fair trial. We affirm.

(1) Perez first complains about the admission of a tape of a 911 call from his mother to the police. He claims it was hearsay. It was not. See United States v. Alarcon-Simi 300 F.3d 1172, 1175-76 (9th Cir.2002); United States v. Gil, 58 F.3d 1414, 1422 (9th Cir.1995); Bemis v. Edwards, 45 F.3d 1369, 1372 (9th Cir.1995). He also claims that it was not at all relevant. We disagree; it had some relevance. See Fed.R.Evid. 401; United States v. Blitz, 151 F.3d 1002 , 1007 (9th Cir.1998); see also United States v. Valencia-Amezcua, 278 F.3d 901 , 906 n. 2 (9th Cir. 2002). Finally, he claims that its prejudicial effect outweighed its relevance. See Fed.R.Evid. 403; United States v. Layton, 767 F.2d 549 , 555 — 56 (9th Cir.1985). With that we agree, but on the basis of the record in this case, including the ample evidence of his guilt, we are satisfied that the error in admitting the tape was more probably than not harmless. See…