much time as you want if you are the appellant for rebuttal you don't have to ask for permission but just keep an eye on the clock because that is your total time for the argument and when you're out of time the arguments over so with that but the course should look at things like the strength of the evidence to the extent that's in the record what risks the person was placed in a trial but then the court makes clear that and i'm really didn't make a difference to him knowing about these decisions of parole term but i think the evidence is clear that whether or not we think it was wise or foolish to immediately after entering the pleats and tell the defendant the parole consequences of the plea and why was it unreasonable under some control and supreme court authority for the california our courts so it concluded that there was no obligation on the part of the  good time credit none of his good time credit he's going to get state parole at the end which is a form of custody by the c d c involves prescriptions involves exposure to being violated in doing additional time but it's still within the same sentence as men well unlike the federal supervised release which is actually a period of time that can be tracked gone for a period of up to two or three years depending on the severity here the parolee is released from confinement prior to the completion or expiration of the full term of his sentence isn't that correct actually i don't think that's correct your honor i'm sure california law unlike the traditional pool systems where one would get part of their time in the prison excuse while they were out on parole in might earn good time credits he might not earn good time credits he might do the entire thirty seven years ok depending on his half parole following that no matter even rest in the traditional system speak you have a parole eligibility date he could i think it is more like federal supervised release and it can result in a sentence where i mean he has no guarantee he's going to get good time credits so he could do thirty seven years and at the end served the full term it seems that they're always released shy of it for whatever reason or time credits can be taken away they can be restored it's not like you lose them forever right somehow learned you know does it matter if you were an all or none of your good time credit you're going to be on parole afterwards so i hope that answers the question and i'd like to reserve my remaining minute and a half very w trial court struck two of them so he was sentenced as a third strike offender with one prior strike consequently he's under the eighty percent provision and he does earn good conduct and work credits at that at that rate advisements are required by a state rule of criminal procedure and in this particular case parole consequences are normally given at a sentencing hearing as a rule as something under the yes you know determinant sentence basically always has a parole term attached to it according to penal code section three thousand and it's a point made in a couple of the california case and that's including mo that a parole term isn't something that's even negotiable you can't you can't as a as a part of a plea bargain say well ok i'm only going to do thirty seven years but i know perl it's just not something that can be negotiated away so district judges analysis and he said i have in front of me basically an affidavit by the defendant saying i would not have pled guilty if i would have known and then district court said well i don't have to credit that particularly in light of the objective evidence facing the defendant at the time he pled guilty namely the charges the strength of the case from the sentence and the sentence from and that sort of thing so we take into account the fact that he could period but the trial court told him it was under this three strikes law and that implies the rest of it goes with the three strikes sentencing provisions and burrell of the court actually did approve that case so so that under the california anyway but we do look at the record to see if you knew him and in this case he knew it so under going can fall that would be satisfied but under the other kind of guilty plea error namely the failure to warn of a consequence that we have to look at that at the transcript of this change plea and sentencing hearing i would assume that in his prior plea entries as provided by the california created will that the judge should warn of the mandatory parole term i would assume that he was told that in his prior entries of plea in this one it was done he went to former will for twelve of the california rules of court which is a very reduced sort of plea in sentencing procedure if everyone agrees on a number of years then the judge doesn't get referred to probation and the judge  and you look at the evidence of what this defendant would have done and i think during the evidence it's clear he tries to get out of this when the state still has everything ready to go for trial he sincerely wanted to get out of this thank you thank you