Thompson

MEMORANDUM **

Annevia Ruffin Thompson (“Thompson”) challenges her mail fraud and possession of stolen mail convictions on the grounds that damaging evidence was unlawfully-seized, improperly admitted, or both. Thompson also challenges her sentence on the grounds that the district court improperly imposed a twelve-point Guidelines enhancement under section 2B1.1(b)(1) and made an improper delegation to the Probation Office in imposing a particular condition of supervised release.

Assuming, without deciding, that the seizure of evidence from Thompson’s hotel room was unlawful under Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 , 126 S.Ct. 1515 , 164 L.Ed.2d 208 (2006), the admission of this evidence to impeach Thompson on cross-examination was proper. James v. Illinois, 493 U.S. 307, 308-09 , 110 S.Ct. 648 , 107 L.Ed.2d 676 (1990). To the extent that a brief mention of this evidence was made during the government’s case-in-chief, the court is “convinced ... beyond a reasonable doubt ... that the improperly admitted evidence” — if, indeed, improperly admitted — “did not contribute to the verdict.” United States v. Bishop, 264 F.3d 919, 927 (9th Cir.2001).

Further, the district court did not…