major hospital who possessed a master’s degree in medical management, was not able to convince the jury that any of this was good faith error. Given this evidence, the question of whether Palazzo billed more hours than were possible in a day was minor, or even irrelevant, because none of the bills charged in the indictment were properly submitted for eligible services actually performed. In other words, the evidence, without the chart, showed that Palazzo had never performed any of the services in question and that none of the services submitted were eligible for reimbursement, and therefore the implication created by the demonstrative aid, if any, that she could not have performed all of the fictitious services in the time she claimed was not prejudicial. See Winn, 948 F.2d at 157-58 (<HOLDING>). Loss & Forfeiture Calculations Factual
holding improperly admitted evidence was harmless error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt holding that any error in admission of demonstrative aid was harmless because evidence of defendants guilt was overwhelming holding the error harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt holding that error from the erroneous admission of evidence was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendants guilt holding that any error that court may have made in admitting inadmissible evidence was harmless because government presented overwhelming evidence establishing defendants guilt