Stephanie Smith appeals her convictions for conspiracy to commit health care fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371; three counts of receiving health care kickbacks, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1320(b)(1)(A)-(B); conspiracy to commit money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h); and money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(1)(B)®. She asserts the district court abused its discretion by admitting into evidence tax forms Smith completed and attached to a mortgage application after the health care fraud conspiracy had ended. Smith also challenges one of the district court’s jury instructions.

We review a district court’s evidentiary rulings for abuse of discretion. United States v. Ndiaye, 434 F.3d 1270, 1280 (11th Cir. 2006). We review a challenge to a jury instruction de novo. Id.

After hearing oral argument in this case and reviewing the record on appeal, we have determined the district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting the tax forms and did not err in instructing the jury. Accordingly, we affirm.

AFFIRMED.