Prado-Medina

MEMORANDUM **

Emilio Andy Prado-Medina appeals from his conviction on a charge of being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition, 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g)(1), and from the conditions of supervised release imposed upon him. We affirm in part and reverse and remand in part.

I.

Prado argues that the evidence that he possessed the gun was not sufficient to convict him. This court reviews de novo claims that the evidence was insufficient to support a conviction. United States v. Corona-Verbera, 509 F.3d 1105, 1117 (9th Cir.2007). “There is sufficient evidence to support a conviction if, viewing the 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.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). “Con *689 flicting evidence is to be resolved in favor of the jury verdict, and all reasonable inferences are to be drawn in favor of the government.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted).

The evidence in this case easily passes the test of sufficiency. Los Angeles Police Department Officer Dorian Brown saw Prado look at the police car and then take something out of his waistband.…