Is there any case law where a rational jury would have found appellant guilty regardless of the errors on appeal?

Looking at the record as a whole, it is clear beyond a reasonable doubt that a rational jury would have found appellant guilty, regardless of the errors he claims on appeal. (Neder v. United States (1999) 527 U.S. 1, 18; Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18, 23 [no reasonable possibility that the evidence complained of contributed to the conviction]; People v. Leon (2015) 61 Cal.4th 569, 604 [assuming evidence was erroneously admitted, the issue is whether the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt].)