Maria Luisa Lopez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 63-month sentence imposed following her guilty-plea conviction for importation of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Lopez contends that the district court procedurally erred in a number of ways when it denied her a minor role adjust ment and sentenced her to 63 months m prison. We need not determine whether there were any procedural errors because-it is apparent from the record that any error was harmless. See United States v. Leal-Vega, 680 F.3d 1160, 1170 (9th Cir.2012) (<HOLDING>). The district court imposed a two-level
holding that even if a trial court errs in a ruling on the admissibility of evidence we will reverse only if the error is inconsistent with substantial justice and that the error was harmless holding that the district court normally should begin with a guidelines calculation recognizing that harmless error review applies when the court errs in the guidelines calculation holding any possible error in a guidelines calculation harmless where this court was confident  that the district court could  and would  impose the same sentence again under the nowadvisory guidelines regime holding that plain error review applies when a party fails to raise a claim before the district court