on this this case is a little different than the usual davis based appeals simply because in this case  it's clear that davis says that the racketeering conspiracy is not a crime of violence and the government concedes as much and while it is true that a nine  based on a drug trafficking crime we certainly don't dispute that in this case the way the government drafted the indictment the nine hundred and twenty four dollars c is based on both the racketeering conspiracy and the drug trafficking conspiracy and they cannot be separate and because they cannot be separated the ny twenty four dollars c hast for all the government argues that under  but that's was is different then what we have here because vasquez was not ereka tiering conspiracy it was a robbery conspiracy and the robbery was for the robbery of drug dealers in order to get their proceeds get their drugs and continue their drug trafficking activities and soon it was as the this court said in invest in inextricably intertwined  well i understand that but this is what's odd is so odd to me because it seems to me that the indictment sargent's you diamond looks to me to be charging brandon's district cites its sites triple or the drug conspiracy they say bilking doesn't tell us which one i agree right but that they if they had said if they had asked if they'd asked a special verdict and st said  racketeering guilty guilty guilty and then or and then narcotics guilty guilty guilty we have no doubt about usen further that's right that's correct your honor but but also a judge was the vernon she asked then it's an ambiguous hurt it i know i believe as was doesn't apply because of the difference in the underlying conspiracy ok i reckon syria is different the robbery conspiracy in a robbery conspiracy can clearly be inextricably requires both the records hearing and then the narcotics conspiracies of the way that the nine hundred and twenty four seat count is drafted it's and says a crime of violence and a drug hearing also included acts of violence murder assault on turf fights and so on and so forth they didn't need although they were dealing drugs apparently they didn't need to do that in order to be convicted of this racketeering i think the that just means the sensing enhancement doesn't quite cut it but i disagree i think that's a you know i think that's a clear indication that the jury said this is a crime of violence this is a drug trafficking crime the gun was connected to the violence there is no proof that is premised on an understanding that you can't have a nine hundred and twenty four discharge in furtherance of a rico conspiracy as a crime of violence right you are are yes or no the enhanced meaning to discharge yes yes yes now given that given and that is premised on the belief that the rico conviction the rico does not constitute a crime of violence is that correct yes you are all right now what about use or further it's as true rico if you're on your own are you referring to the nine hundred and twenty four seat the conviction itself or one gets to the given the rico scheme as all kinds of stuff and davis tells us that it is this possible that there could be non crimes of violence in there or non drug conspiracy by the way it's not how you argue not necessarily you what that's not what the u s attorney said in the closing statement says dahl about violence of all gun violence so he didn't there the closing argument was these are all fit together anything that protects the rico anything that protects the turf also protects the drug conspiracy that's not how the the argument was made so i mean i give you have broader scheme of things though i think one looks at both the finding of drug trafficking as an object to the racketeering conspiracy judging the myers description of the evidence and the and the actual evidence at trial it is it is clear that the hindsight's always two thousand and twenty mr nichols ok so we have the benefit of that as appellate judges are not not being personally critical of you or the or the office or it's you've got a situation where the jury some troubled and the record also shows numerous incidents the stabbing at the barber shop you know various kind of fights over turf that weren't necessarily so obviously linked to drug dealing gun was not shown to be in charge so for example the core or call there's or there was evidence of mr hayward standing done in the in the light pole of the street where the gang of the street where eighteen parked up trucks and telling people you need a gun at your that's the thing they call a name that street after the drug hersey they meet on it so there is a disagreement you're absolutely right about that but the problem is that i have a hard time getting this into  here the rico is a broader got a broader reach judge carney pointed out the assaults in the barbershop the gunfight in the parking lot one when he that guns were used in furtherance of the conspiracy i think it's a combination your honor of the of the of the evidence at trial and the and the jury's explicit finding that that trap trapping was an object in   i would certainly think that your honors the discretion would be more important than what i think with respect to that i think that given the government's concession a given the fact that we have an unusual fact pattern here perhaps you do want to wait to see how the the other case is full out i'm waiting on a couple of those myself but