ORDER Defendant appeals a conviction for crimes relating to possession of crack cocaine and of a firearm. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the facts of the case, its procedural history, and the scope of the issues on appeal. I. Admission of a Tape Recorded Prison Telephone Conversation Defendant argues that admission of a recorded telephone conversation between himself and an unknown speaker, not available in court, violated his constitutional confrontation right. Because of the strength of the other evidence against Defendant, any conceivable error in admitting the recorded telephone conversation was harmless. See United States v. Vitale, 459 F.3d 190, 195 (2d Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Colombo, 909 F.2d 711, 714
holding that confrontation clause issues are subject to harmless error analysis holding that a confrontation clause violation constituted harmless error holding evidentiary rulings are subject to harmless error analysis holding trial errors are subject to a harmless error analysis holding that confrontation clause violations are subject to harmless error review