L. In conducting harmless-error review, an appellate court may not resolve
conflicting evidence or assess the credibility of witnesses. Neder v. United
States, 527 U.S. 1, 19 (1999); Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U.S. 750, 763-67
(1946); Weiler v. United States, 323 U.S. 606, 611 (1945).

The Ninth Circuit concluded that multiple errors were harmless even though
rational jurors could have declined to convict in the absence of the errors.
Is the Ninth Circuit's decision consistent with this Court's precedents?

I. In a tax prosecution, "forbidding the jury to consider evidence that might
negate willfulness" raises "a serious question under the Sixth Amendment's
jury trial provision." Cheek v. United States, 498 U.S. 192, 203 (1991). Here,
the Ninth Circuit sanctioned the preclusion of evidence tending to negate
willfulness in a tax prosecution.

Is the Ninth Circuit's decision consistent with Cheek?

Whether the Ninth Circuit's harmless-error analysis is consistent with Supreme Court precedent