that conviction of possession requires evidence tying the defendant to the specific contraband he is accused of possessing in this case the government failed to do that therefore the conviction must be reversed there because there is not a connection to the specific methamphetamine or from the apartment there is not sufficient evidence that he mr gonzales constructively possessed that methamphetamine this case is very much like indication in the record of any freelance work that bernie and as was doing independently of gonzales yes there is one out there as there is some indication that mr hernandez would give would give some methamphetamine to the people under him mr weil for example without mr gonzales permission or knowledge there is there is testimony about that from mr riehl it was discussed on some of the telephone calls and there was also some evidence that there was more than one source of methamphetamine there is an earlier source from las vegas that individual had been or the connection was gone by the by september when he was arrested but then there is also discussion on the record of some other individual who was not conviction for conspiracy and the conviction for the possession of the firearm in furtherance of the drug trafficking crime but the remedy would be a remand for every sentence in under this court's cases that there is a discussion that the district judge may even if same charges conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute and the district judge nevertheless may have sentenced the defendant to a higher total concurrent sentence or honestly believe that there is two counts rather than one so the court because there is a single a single set of narcotics in that case it was cocaine there were six kilograms and they thought they knew where it came from and they knew where it was going and the question was simply a matter of  control in this case there was there was some testimony that there was control over a shipment supposedly that was supposed to be sent from california but there was no the final link is missing that there was nothing that connected the actual methamphetamine se to that which was supposedly center was supposed to be sent from california before mr gonzales would arrive and without that missing link and if that's why there's insufficient evidence for constructive possession in this case which in a sense is also like wyndham the other case that the government relies on there or there is quite a few convictions for possession but one of one of the convictions was reversed it was  also connection to other other narcotics that were seized but the connection to the the money from the control by wasn't enough to connect him to the drugs in the backpack because the government failed to connect to connect all of the steps  and it's a scene problem that exists here there was perhaps perhaps absent of evidence to tie mr gonzales to the controlled by that took place the day before he was arrested there is some suggestion that the that methamphetamine came from here but there was no connection made to the actual methamphetamine seized the only connection was that the wrist couple officers testified that there was wrapping paper or there is wrappers that they thought it might be related but there was no testing that was  deploys they please the court good morning don boyce from southern illinois are for the united states asking the court to affirm the conviction in this case because there was more than ample evidence to show that williams always was a mere bystander in this case he was the person who exercise control over these drugs through others that's that there is constructive possession there's a lot of historical evidence about the dealings with this organization basically zachary while was a guy who lived in the st louis area he got thirty to sixty pounds of methamphetamine from who lived out in california during the relevant time period while explain that gonzales was out there he had the supplier for the ice in solace sent her mandas to bell of illinois to hold the ice and to parcel it out who're well while talk about ordering it from was on the phone with gonzalez in the in the phone calls leading up to it so that the benefit of mean arrived in the middle of september the last conversations were in late august early august twenty seventh while his recorded talking that is that the ice has arrived that the key to tie this all together after this particular contraband is the da sets up one more deal so they can get probable cause for hernandez's apartment the initial deal is for two ounces that's the first agreement while calls back to one and as and says can make a half pound i really don't want to mess around with this little two ounces or man does his responses well i have to check with him solace and see if that's ok so he needs permission to sell the the half pound on the fourteenth so that deal happens on the fourteenth in the evening it was dark out they get the search warrant at midnight the warn is executed the next morning at about eight am after the group gets back from being out all night that's when the drugs are recovered that's when they find the empty packaging which suggested everyone that the drugs that had been delivered the half pound the night before for which hernandez needed permission to deliver it that had come from this same load so all that suggests very strongly that these are going solaces drugs that he possesses them through intermediaries to distinguish the herrera case that was mentioned a minute ago the difference there would be if the owner of the house where the footlocker was it said you need herrera permission to get that heroin out of there that would be the fact that would make it more like our case and would have shown that herrera really was the one who controlled those dru s manzella is quoted throughout the briefs there's a line in that that says it would be odd if a dealer could not be guilty of possession merely because he had the resources to hire a flunky to have custody of the drugs that's that's our case  well there is evidence that he could be liable on a conspiracy theory it doesn't mean he constructively possessed every bit of methamphetamine that was part of the conspiracy the the it if there is a if there was a link tying the methamphetamine in the cooler to something he was currently possessing or controlling that could be enough but that sounds like the farthest the government gets with its links is that controlled was testimony from officers who said they guessed that the that the empty tank and he meant that it perhaps some of the methods had already been distributed but the government could have put out his evidence tying the to testing testing the meth and it chemically to the meth from the cooler when the lack of the link with the lack of that link in herrera is part of the reason why this court reversed there was it was a different type of meth in the foot locker from then on the person the government should be rewarded by not testing it at all  likewise in windham there was money from a controlled by that was high on the defendant but the government failed to link the money to the control by to the source of the drugs speeding from the back that final link is missing in this chain here if the government had tested it put on evidence from chemically linking the meth from the control by with its source be in the cooler we would be this argument the much tougher to make this argument because that final link would be there would be when the government failed to make that link that's why that's why there is insufficient evidence to convict mr gonzales of constructive possession of the specific meth in the cooler in the hernandez was good zone was paying the rent on this place there was testimony there was in one of the recordings there is a statement that he was supposed to be paying the rent but he had not paid rent