Magbaleta

*719 MEMORANDUM **

Defendant-Appellant Atilano Magbaleta (“Magbaleta”) appeals his conviction for assault by striking, beating, or wounding within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 113 (a)(4). Magbaleta was convicted following a one-day bench trial before a magistrate judge and the district court denied his appeal from the conviction. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

A conviction is supported by sufficient evidence if, viewed in the light most favorable to the government, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. See United States v. Sanders, 421 F.3d 1044, 1049 (9th Cir.2005). This test applies to jury and bench trials. United States v. Magallon-Jimenez, 219 F.3d 1109, 1112 (9th Cir.2000).

Magbaleta first contends that the district court did not properly apply the proportionality requirement of the self-defense doctrine. There is no indication in the record that the magistrate judge applied an improper standard to the self-defense claim, and the photographs of the victim’s injuries and the testimony at trial support the district court’s…