Priest

MEMORANDUM *

Co-defendants Keith Priest, Patricia Ann Ensign and Rachel McElhinney appeal from their convictions for failing to file federal income tax returns. Because the parties are familiar with the facts and procedural history, we do not restate them here except as necessary to explain our decision. We have considered all the arguments they raise on appeal and affirm their convictions and sentences.

1. Priest contends that the evidence presented would not allow a reasonable juror to find that he acted willfully when he failed to file income tax returns *253 and accordingly, his motion for judgment of acquittal should have been granted. In particular, Priest argues that pursuant to Cheek v. United States, 498 U.S. 192 , 111 S.Ct. 604 , 112 L.Ed.2d 617 (1991), the government was required to prove, and failed to prove, that he had the specific criminal intent to violate the law. We review the denial of a motion for judgment of acquittal de novo. United States v. Zavala-Mendez, 411 F.3d 1116, 1118 (9th Cir. 2005). “Thus, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the government, we must determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found, beyond a…