Herrera

MEMORANDUM *

Cenobio Humberto Herrera appeals his conviction after a jury trial for various crimes related to his operation of a business selling large quantities of pseu-doephedrine. He attacks the sufficiency of the evidence introduced at trial; the jury instructions; the district court’s decision to permit Herrera’s co-defendant sister to testify in a manner that allegedly incriminated him; the district court’s failure to sever his trial from his sister’s and the district court’s limitation on eross-examina *688 tion. He also requests a limited remand under United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). We reject all of Herrera’s claims on the merits and therefore affirm. We do, however, grant Herrera’s request for an Ameline remand.

We review Herrera’s challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence for plain error. See United States v. Alvarez-Valenzuela, 231 F.3d 1198, 1200-01 (9th Cir. 2000). There was overwhelming evidence — including the testimony of three co-conspirators and extensive circumstantial evidence — that Herrera conspired with others to achieve the methamphetamine related object of the conspiracy; that he specifically intended to facilitate…