Valentine

MEMORANDUM *

Lawrence R. Valentine appeals his jury conviction and sentence for uttering counterfeit obligations and securities in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 472 , possessing counterfeit and forged securities in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 513 (a), and bank fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344 . We affirm.

*884 Valentine first argues that there was insufficient evidence to uphold the jury’s verdict. He relies on his own testimony and ignores the prosecutor’s witnesses and evidence. In considering a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we consider whether, after “viewing 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. Moses, 496 F.3d 984, 987 (9th Cir.2007). Because Valentine failed to renew his motion for judgment of acquittal, plain error review applies. United States v. Alvarez-Valenzuela, 231 F.3d 1198, 1200-01 (9th Cir.2000). The jury believed the prosecution’s witnesses, who provided sufficient evidence to prove all the essential elements of the crimes charged. See United States v. Alarcon-Simi, 300 F.3d 1172, 1176 (9th Cir.2002)…