reversal. Gonzalez was stopped at a border checkpoint at Bridge 2 in Laredo, Texas, when she entered the United States from Mexico driving a van. A border patrol officer referred her to the secondary inspection area, because Gonzalez appeared nervous and had glanced toward the ceiling of the van. In the secondary inspection area, a canine alerted to all four corners of the roof. An x-ray revealed an anomaly in the roof of the van. An officer drilled into the roof and discovered forty packages of cocaine having a total weight of forty-eight kilograms, hidden in a very sophisticated manner in a compartment in the top rear portion of the roof. Incorrect jury instructions are generally not considered structural errors. Hedgpeth v. Pulido, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 530, 532, — L.Ed.2d-(2008) (<HOLDING>). We apply the plain error standard of review
holding that instructional errors that are trial errors are subject to harmless error analysis holding trial errors are subject to a harmless error analysis holding that harmless error analysis applies to sandstrom mandatory presumption errors holding blakely errors are subject to harmless error analysis holding that instructional errors that do not categorically vitiate all the jurys findings  are trial errors as to which harmless error analysis applies not structural errors emphasis and internal quotation marks omitted quoting neder v united states 527 us 1 11 119 sct 1827 144 led2d 35 1999