not simply remain on the case for sensing under the provision that existed before the amendment i mean that's to me that looks pretty straightforward and simple i think that house child says in the sense that the party has never asked that predatory criminal sexual assault was a completely new facts in this line of cases as confirmed there affirmed by a hostile there is a difference when the only location in my brief for the jury was instructor pursuant to the former a five dangerous weapon so to the extent they were arguing lesser included or again  lack of a better term it's almost a hybrid lesser included because obviously aggravated kidnapping is not the sort of lesser included of aggravated kidnapping although you could argue that aggravated kidnapping fire does have a lesser included aggravated kidnapping dangerous weapon so that was what was presented to the jury so in answer justice perhaps to your question did the jury not find the specific separate courts obviously unified system but you separate courts found that the only problem was a unconstitutional sentence not an unconstitutional or avoid conviction and as i foul you're saying to some extent yeah exactly i mean the the whole concept other than anders itself every case since that has applied hostile and this is that it is a hybrid because the people would argue that that aggravated kidnapping with a dangerous weapon is arguably a lesser included offense of aggravated kidnapping with a firearm and so by virtue of the instruction essentially and the finding of the jury you personally if you are the state is not now concerned about counsel severability argument because that inherent because those were specifically aggravated kidnapping and the two courts decide it specifically on this actual facts there are numerous other cases that relate to the it seems that justice doesn't or wouldn't be appropriate to say well if the defense counsel smart enough to raise so you can raise it any time and hostile can give single back now and make those arguments but i think that either way you can then go to my nd alternative argument which is lesser included offense and even if it is a hybrid an aggravated kidnapping with a dangerous weapon we would argue using a lesser included offense of aggravated kidnapping with a firearm but as i said in this case we have that specific back yes we don't where the people are now arguing that the venue was found guilty or or we should amend it on appeal we're saying defendant was found guilty of a five under the prior sentence even though that wasn't the official issues which which i would ask you to address the issue with respect the jury instruction on this given the german instruction that was given was not on their new boy defense the jury instructions were given more on the once so where's the due process violation here to your client where he's charged with the offense that existed at the time but as it is it turns out that charges the fact of what and guilty of all the elements that existed prior under the prior offense it just seems logical that it be an aberration to say oh we're going to forget this it's like you said it's like this was just the dream didn't