cases where the provocation mitigator was at issue. It was addressed and argued by both sides, and the jury was asked to make a finding. Here the jury made the finding. It made a specific finding for the provocation mitigator. And while it didn't find it on each and every specific count, that was solely because the instruction wasn't given even though requested. Counsel, um, shouldn't the arguments related to Proposition three B, are they ripe for for ruling? Shouldn't these arguments be made at the -- at the trial court, given the fact that this was remanded? So, Your Honor, this was remanded for a retrial and it's remanded on the grounds of double jeopardy through the prong of collateral estoppel. And under double jeopardy, not only