transcript it doesn't amplify sensing reform jack and the juvenile delinquency and i'm going to first talk about the legality of the sentence within the context of the district court's failure even mentioning chapter seven act straight if you will i don't think it would further my argument if you for instance got thirty seven months i think it would actually probably hurt my argument because then the court one the government could argue that the district court did perhaps consider mitigating factors which is in the confines of the thirty five fifty three factors but the other issue too is that if one looks at the adult revocation statute thirty five see besides just punishment there's other issues that and it's thirty five fifty three to upper case that it talks about respect for the law and just punishment and if you look at the court really well because it wasn't long after that he started transgressing well within a week after getting out it was a week after both within the context of swan he did well but unfortunately once he got back in the community you know they did try to place him in a good good home and argue for a long term detention since well again i think you know i'll concede that it wasn't a good fact for my client but if you consider the  the juvenile delinquency act give him another chance you know he didn't get any of the attention so here's a kid who's going to get for the first time ten months detention perhaps or nine months or eighteen months then put him back out in the community see what he does good morning your honors my name is lori and i mean i could state attorney from the district of montana in this case what we have is a technical glitch by the district court there's no doubt that he failed to reference treatment was necessary and the only way that that could be accomplished was in a structured environment and let me ask you a question you say it's a technical glitch that the judge didn't mention the advisory policy absolutely how do you explain this statement twenty three this is the prosecutor statement prosecutors say a juvenile sentence is appropriate in this wanted advisory guideline range and the judge completely disregarded that your honor i interpreted that statement by the prosecutor who was at the hearing in this case a plane air argument has been raised that makes it quite clear that it can be a problem the chapter seven policy statements are just that policy and the guidelines and the pla outside but it was a sentence at the very high end of the range and certainly the prosecutor united states can advocate for a sentence somewhat less it is of course the decision of the district court as to what is best to do looking at a juvenile like this juvenile here wouldn't consider not only the nature of the offenses but the nature of the violations they guy the district court as to what the needs of the juvenile are and in this case it was a serious underlying the finance and the violations for what they told the court they told them him this this juvenile cannot comply with few dishes outside of a structured environment not all the juveniles fault there was no supervisory person in this juveniles life and all the district court knew that that was of record these violations showed a substance abuse problem a serious lack of respect for authority so judge had and was faced with a fourteen year old juvenile and in his mind a chance to re before this juvenile gets any older and becomes adult and then faces those drastic consequences and in his view a structured environment for a long time was necessary this juvenile wasn't getting any education at fourteen years old he was looking to get his high school diploma as well as treatment and so when we look at this case although the judge did focus on thirty five fifty three a to an extent and and you may think even to too much of an extent because clearly the juvenile delinquency act requires rehabilitation his statements walk hand in hand with his desire stands for forty six months very much supervised that he's in custody and then it's wide open one of the things that offense suggested it was at least there should be some consideration of a transition obviously the defense would seek much less than forty six months but agree i really have to tell you i agree i think judge bay has pointed out that the prosecutor didn't ask for the high and of that that advisory guideline and although i wasn't that prosecutor i would suggest probably for that reason that when you have a juvenile of this age you want some transition period but what we're here as you also said to you is not to redo it again it's not wrong if we would have just done it differently than the district court he has to have errored and some legal error that would make a difference i found on some level we know that there's a potentially technical error with regard to not risk so so i think view the case i'm looking well what difference does that really make here and i think that's the question you posed at the outset yes and frankly i'm and many ways sympathetic with your argument this is me judge had his intent was not as a surly inconsistent with the policy statements and then i had this one element which does give me some serious bars i understand and he didn't reference the chapter seven policy statements and judge ferris asked the question to mr harvey needs that i found interesting would it have made a difference i think your question was if you had gotten a lower sentence than what the judge imposed was that your question point in the view of what i read from this transcript from such hadn't wouldn't have made it if it was something lower than what it was maybe but i think judge haddon's view was higher here as to what he wanted done here structured environment for the longest time possible because he didn't see any other way and whether i or the court agrees with that concept in the transition period is exactly why  amended a few years ago when i first started in this business in the mid ninety's we did have this option of juvenile supervision after detention which was clearly just a train wreck with most of these juveniles i saw them immediately after no other questions if you think  playing with matches and unfortunately sat with two girls who were charged and sets up an apartment building on fire and you know what happens and you know it too they didn't notify anybody they knew there was a fire and they though this one valuable camp is one isn't is not an option because he's already done it because it's not in business anymore there are other other things like private schools indian native american boarding schools that i've got a lot of kids and  unfortunately on the first leg of this journey not on the back end but let's try it on the back and let's at least give it a shot you know let's talk to the probation department work with them a little more i certainly would do that and work with i do that as we might do that juvenile case from a few years back you know perhaps is something that we all know about in the signs of negative like what he does i see him every day in court i think he does care and i think th reflection what i really wonder at this point now is having had this sense that look we gave you a chance once you not only family get and you kicked it out of the park you know in the old days and i know i don't know how much and it was pretty effective this i say this would be a great shock treatment he's he thinks he's looking at forty six months right now we bring him back we work with the probation office the probation office does a great job talking to the judge a judge listens to them and