Bronte

*769 MEMORANDUM *

Randolph Stephen Bronte appeals from his conviction and sentence on two counts of tax evasion in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7201 for the years 1998 and 1999, and three counts of filing false federal income tax returns in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7206 (1) for the years 1998 through 2000. We affirm.

Bronte faults the court for failing sua sponte to instruct on the bank deposits method of proof, see United States v. Hall, 650 F.2d 994 , 996 n. 4 (9th Cir.1981) (per curiam); United States v. Boulware, 384 F.3d 794, 811 (9th Cir.2004), and argues that the evidence was insufficient to establish reportable income by that method. However, a review of the record indicates that, despite an occasional reference to a bank deposits method, the government largely proved its case against Bronte by tracking deposits by third parties into Bronte’s account, i.e., by the specific items method of proof. See United States v. Marabelles, 724 F.2d 1374 , 1377 n. 1 (9th Cir.1984). Accordingly, there was neither plain instructional error nor any question that a rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crimes beyond a reasonable doubt. See Jackson v. Virginia,…