the question before the court today is whether the state prove that alycia had constructive possession of these crimes the state did not prove that alycia had knowledge or control of the guns where one he did not live in the apartment and was not present at the time of the search knowledge of the guns or control over the area where they were found first he was not in the apartment at the time of the search he did not live there you can't prove that he had knowledge of anything that was in the apartment second there were other people in the house who had access to this room and possibly these guns and ammunition and there's no dispute that when the officers came to the house that christopher blanchard was fair and he said that he had been staying  alycia testified that she lived there with a young child that christopher lived there and that her other brother michael with there so clearly there are other people who could have had access to these guns and just simply cannot make the inference that alycia may have lived there at one time that he had knowledge and control of these kinds specially where these times were not in plain view they were hidden there under a mattress they were hidden under clothes this state's only evidence against was the fact that his driver's license had this address a place where he used to live and a check that was hit in that was put away in the trailer not even where the guns were found it was in a different place in a different area of the bedroom where the guns were found under a no longer his residence it was still a family residence where you know it's not the situation where once you move somewhere you need to change all of your addresses because you will no longer have any connection to this place it's the  dated the day before this search occurred so it makes sense that the check may have just arrived it was put away for safe keeping until the future date where alycia had the opportunity to endorse it and then i could then deposit it for him as for the renewable of the tribe or his license i can think of any number of reasons why he kept that attracts the most obvious of which being the convenience i know when i went when i  license there's a couple ways you can do it in the easiest way being if they just send you a form in the mail you fill it out and you send it right back and you get a sticker and you put it on your license without any of the muslim fuss of going to the d m v and changing it and like i said so he said maybe he's moving he has moved some or all this is home and we don't know the circumstances of that he's moving maybe she moved out of the home because suddenly his friends are living there with her more crowded he's living with morales but we don't know in the future if that's going to be in the future a permanent home there's all kinds of reasons that we can think of for why he had not immediately changed his address none of which changes the fact that he just was not there at the time of the search and there's nothing to infer that he had knowledge or control over these guns or control the area from which they were found they were hidden there are other people there the state simply has failed to present any evidence showing his knowledge or his control of these guns no rational trier of fact could find the alycia had knowledge of the guns or that he had control over the area where they were found what should we make of his i mean that's understandable as right it's not a situation where police approach you and you have no idea and you're running because you think he did something wrong he's already been informed that he's going to be arrested he just did not want to be arrested that makes perfect sense to me if these reasons we asked at this quote you first on this he has convictions court in the light most favorable to the people any rational try of facts could have found defendant guilty of unlawful possession of a weapon by a felon on june second chicago police department executed a valid social resit warrant ballot search warrant of defendant's residence at thirty thirty six north not they entered into the first bedroom apartment and they searched the first of two bedrooms the first bedroom being with a perfectly made bed a mattress with a sheet on it halos an address or a closet full of clothing and in underneath that matches they found a gun then they searched the dresser drawer in the dresser drawer underneath men's clothing they found a united states department issued treasury check for defendant with his name in thirty thirty six north notts listed as that address and then in the closet full of men's clothing underneath more clothing they found an additional seven hundred ninety dollars of cash with every band around their own warrant was executed ali eleven thirty eight  found and defendant immediately and said i just executed a search warrant a grim as events thirty thirty six next you need to return to your residence and turn yourself in if you need an extra day you can come in turn yourself in tomorrow if you need to get your affairs in order i question was the second at eleven thirty at night holding a small child a reasonable indication that he was sleeping and according to the officer mr blanchard said i got out of prison recently i and i and my child are visiting the grandfather meaning that if the police are executing a search warrant finding drugs weapons and ammunition would it stands to reason that mr blan in other words he wouldn't want to admit to the police that he had been living there for a year that's that's a reasonable inference however we're looking at the inferences that the trial court made and given that all of the testimony in all of the evidence that she had in front of her and we found that all of her the inferences rational inferences and credibility determinations that she made should be applauded because there's nothing so improbable about them as to overturn it you have testimony from the only conflicting testimony is from the defendant's daughter and his fiance that's the thing about how the extent to which christopher lived there and the trial court made a credibility of terminations about those two witnesses and found them to be as she said absolutely incredible and that was within her proceeded to do and so what we can make a number of inferences that on their own seem to be rational here today the trap that made her inferences about and abilities terminations based on all the testimony and all the evidence she heard and her opportunity to observe these witnesses and assess there is a one of the photographs introduced into evidence shows a box spring leaning up against the wall of the back you can't tell whether there's a mattress there and you you can't tell from the photographs and there's no he said there was a small bed yes and what he also said was what he testified to was that there was this small bed in there but he didn't say that there was any clothing in there he didn't say if there was any  furniture that you would have in a typical bedroom and you can see from photographs that that room is completely full of children's toy children's things it's not a living space in fact the only living space is the first bedroom where his residence bad day he didn't return on the second day and officer that shadow sat outside of their residence and watched as people move items from that into a moving truck and then fairly nine days later is evidence of guilt so you have not just the fright for not turning yourself in on the day of the search when you had an opportunity to speak to sergeant went strong and you didn't come and return to the residence you have people moving out of the house on the childcare needed to have to infer knowledge from the control that bad unless there's proof of residency which was found underneath and he was hiding he similarly treated his personal items the same way whether testimony absolutely incredible and determined then that the proof of residency where it was found where the police recovered it in the first bedroom was rational rationally his he had knowledge of of course determination that that bedroom was the pin and intimate space so if you think about what she did employing out the one hundred eighteen grams of heroin that was found in the kitchen pantry and how that one hundred eighteen grams of heroin found in the kitchen p against the temptation at the ben was different to person like the communal kitchen pantry where all this heroin was found but she understand the trial court's ruling it's that she didn't believe that any of these other adult according to the record but she didn't believe that five people three adults and sometimes two children were living at the same time that the defendant lived there that they were off by living near together and whether or not they where they are we know that christopher was there at the time that the warrant was executed joint possession and doesn't negate exclusive control people versus given so that you can still have joint possession they can put their hands on the contraband and that doesn't negate defendants exclusive control over all of these items and we know that he had control over that space because his proof of residency was found there his id his state id that he had just of dated two months prior had thirty thirty six and are not constructive possession but in the people's case in the trial court said she made all of these inferences and credibility terminations based on the testimony that she heard and there is the  defendant would have this court completely overturned any credibility determination that the child quite made in that and that's just not it's not proper that was put away somewhere where the guns were not even found it simply is no way to infer that alice had knowledge or control all of these items where he was not there and where other people had access  number of people who live there well i think there is no doubt that there is at least christopher blanchard there's no doubt that he was there whether he lived there long term he was there at the time of the search and then the pictures also show that a child that's there is kid stuff there and there is women's items in the bedroom there is clear evidence that most of the lived in this year when there is just simply nothing to connect the defendant to