Veal

MEMORANDUM *

Defendant-Appellant Danny William Veal appeals his convictions of interstate stalking, 18 U.S.C. § 2261A, and interstate violation of a protection order, 18 U.S.C. § 2262 . Veal contends that the evidence was insufficient to secure his convictions. In addition, Veal disputes his sentence on Sixth Amendment grounds and argues that the district court erroneously applied a “pattern of activity” sentencing enhancement.

We have jurisdiction, and we affirm Veal’s conviction. With respect to Veal’s sentence, we issue a limited remand pursuant to United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc).

We review de novo the district court’s denial of Veal’s motion for acquittal based on insufficiency of the evidence. United States v. Carranza, 289 F.3d 634, 641 (9th Cir.2002). There is sufficient evidence to support a conviction “if, after *904 viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” United States v. Manion, 339 F.3d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir.2003) (internal quotation marks omitted).

We conclude that there was sufficient evidence in…