the next case for argument is united states versus the how do how does that work if you know i was going to ask mr dragon ok obviously not important but i'm a convention i have referred to my client as mr pearl to from what i can see any strategic or tactical reason in fact if he's allowed to withdraw his plea that ten year mandatory sentence that judge sessions imposed is gone and he's looking at guidelines that was the that was the finding of the court at the hearing ok so that he said slightly favors not giving him his plea back right because he there was no evidence that he immediately changed his mind following the pl correct correct on the issue of innocence he credit the tourney that your client confessed in the jail that he knew that this was drug money right he credited and obviously we have the sworn testimony s assertion that his client confessed at that august th meeting trial and was asked by mr drescher at that hearing whether he had explained what it what conspiracy  if it was obvious from the change of plea hearing that mr perata was confused about what conspiracy met me for example if i took the money from point a to point b was i guilty without knowing what the point of the soldiers he was my impression you know i'm not is deeply into this is either of you obviously but it's the whole notion of conspiracy which is hard enough for us observation i think that's correct and that's the point i was making is that mr allen was asked to do mr drescher did you discuss with your client what conspiracy  said of course i'm having that discussion with him any time he's telling me he had no involvement at all we certainly discussed the meaning of conspiracy but he was saying he had no idea that knew it was drugs and that he knew that what he was doing and he would he was doing that and he apologized for having misled me from something less so he admitted obviously he was involved with the movie the money being under oath like client said three times that he did not participate in a conspiracy knowingly ok here's the question the judge asked him so essentially you took packages w prince was out of the country this is the judge you were fully aware that that was part of the drug conspiracy and also that you connected money and move money around and you quite answered yes that was after that one hour break we were he may have had a discussion about conspiracy law and well there was no testimony to that because mr mr allen was asked specifically did you talk about conspiracy during that meeting and he said i don't know but he admitted the facts make you  basis is that what happened no that's not what happened nd time he's asked by judge sessions them so we know that that was the issue right from what the way was reporting to the court and he was asked by judge sessions on page ninety three of the joint appendix what was your understanding of this arrangement mr prawle to like i wasn't involved literally in any of this and then he goes on to say i've been a good citizen i've never done anything wrong i regret my cousin never came to the united states and then they take another break there were five breaks in a half an hour my client told the d a in that three hour interview i don't know what's going on he said that again i don't see anywhere in any point that your client said to the judge i didn't know it was drugs or drug money he didn't say that any point let was not his i mean his claim of innocence wasn't judge i didn't know this was drug money i didn't know was drugs it was much more general than that i don't know he said at one point i don't know how this conspiracy thing works that was with your clients it so it wasn't i didn't know this was drugs i didn't know this was money did he say that to we was there anything in the record before the judge or to his lawyer to anyone else when he testified in the sessions in his written ruling denying the motion is that the court finds that the fent has not consistently maintained its innocence and that's not the standard that you have to be consistent if if you had to consistently maintain your innocence the court would never coerced by their attorneys into doing something that they may be reluctant to do i've been involved in thousands of changes of play and i know what goes on in those rooms and sometimes people really don't want to change their plea and if nothing if nothing it's quite clear from the record that mr paul to was didn't want to change his plea and something happened in that meeting between noon and one i suspect it was look ten you might get ten years from this judge if you change your plea now but if we go to trial and if you lose you're looking at a guideline numbers of up to thirty years and at that moment  didn't want to take the plea we know that from the record because they played that audiotape he sent to a different channel and sent all the ins to northwest and shortly after that he find somebody to help him some jailhouse lawyer helps and file that process in motion and in between the time the motion is filed he meets with the probation officer on august st and we know from the pre sentence report that there was no admission he was never going to mission appeal to in fact the probation officer was told that he did not admit any of the relevant facts and we think that at least i do that he should be given an opportunity to exercise his right to trial and know it's time consuming i know that mr perrault that runs a grave grave risk of a very long prison sentence is something that i have you see how to talk to him about dick before pursuing this appeal he's been very clear he wants a trial and frankly i think he should get one thank you thank you and you think your honour's you reserve two minutes your morning ma'am please the court as your honour's questions pointed out this this appeal is fundamentally about judge sessions credibility assessment judge sessions was careful at the change of plea hearing he carefully considered the motion to withdraw the guilt he took the probably unnecessary step of holding evidentiary hearings on that motion to withdraw he had an opportunity to assess defendant mr lamb's demeanor and admissions at the change of he saw mr lamb examined and cross examined he heard testimony from mr lamb's attorney contradicting in substantial parts what mr lamb claimed to have happened that it being a credibility determination is subject to a very deferential standard of review by this court that being the case we think the record would be ample for this court to affirm the judge sessions apply the wrong standards to ensure he did not he applied the exact right standard he discussed the three frequently articulated factors the the most significant of one i would suggest is whether there was a legitimate or serious claim of innocence by this by the defendant seeking to withdraw his plea this court has made clear i point out the river niger case in particular a district court does not abuse discretion in discrediting a later inconsistent claim of innocence as compared to the sworn admissions at a change of plea colloquy not for that reason i think the district court could have denied the motion to die the motion without holding a hearing but once he took the hearing once he held a hearing and had a nd opportunity to assess mr lamb's credibility and to weigh that against the testimony of his attorney recounting mr williams previous admissions of guilt to him the court had every reason to conclude that this plea was neither coerced nor the plea of somebody who was trying to assert innocence the with regard to your honor's question about the last name judge sac it's my understanding that that lab perrault one is the last name of the father one is the last name of a mother and that the convention is to refer to mr whether conspiracy can be confusing i would suggest in this context the record is clear that that mr lamb was not happy to have been caught being a member of a conspiracy but the elements of conspiracy  somebody who might have mis conceived what is required to break the drug laws that might be a uncomfortable situation to be in this court has made clear in the dough decision that the junk call decision that there is no legal requirement that decision to plead guilty be an easy one in fact it should be a hard one because pleading guilty results in a conviction and the fact that mr lamb was not happy about pleading guilty does not indicate that he was  pleading as a result of coercion when the briefs were text messages and photos of the packages between him and one of the coconspirators is that accurate that is accurate yes or no is what packages so the nature of the conspiracy was the  heroin was shipped into southern vermont into manchester vermont from guatemala in a series of d h l shipments that started in the summer of two thousand and fifteen that when  states in august and after he left there were a series of packages that came in in september leading up to the final package that was intercepted in october the package the shipments that arrived in september all of which were  ere the subject of the text messages that your honor is asking about the text messages showed that making a parade ace while he was in guatemala was directing me here as to how to inspect the packages how to do photograph the packages where to take the packages what to do what to give and what to receive how to conduct himself around the people that he was traveling to southern new england to engage in business with though that was the evidence that the that had come into the government's hands as a result of forensic advances as we were heading towards trial and that was produced promptly when when we received it in the r hearing he had a hearing before the district court on an appeal from the detention order he had a hearing on the process post arrest statement he had the change of plea hearing he had two separate hearings with regard to the evidence th evidentiary hearing related to his motion to withdraw the plea at no point was there a suggestion that mr lamb did not understand what was happening and having had the opportunity to linguist linguistically he did he understood the language he was judge sessions saw him be examined and cross examined in the english language and the answer to your honest question which i should have said i is that is the determination that the plea was not voluntary i know there hasn't been one would not have to be a determination that his attorney mr allen essentially he communicated the sentence saying that he would that the plea agreement offered a sentencing risk mitigator and was very candid in his view of the case to mr lamb this court's made clear i believe in the not only the call case that a pessimistic you know a advice of an attorney that the defendant doesn't want to hear does not constitute coercion you don't have to have he could have got his plea back even in the absence of course in other words if he change his mind the next day and is claiming actual innocence and he would be no princes in the government if it was a day later really you could you know you don't have to have him to be able to get his plea that the factors would certainly be different in that circumstance and i'm glad as as an advocate i'm not trying to i'm not trying to defend that appeal but i can certainly imagine scenarios if for example the plea happens in the middle of the trial where the the need and the policy reasons behind the need for finality and predictability of changes of plea would still factor against letting somebody out of a plea even if he declared he changed his mind the next day in this case the record the factual finding is that he took about thirty days before he coerced the attorney might is by his former attorney that's my understanding he doesn't there's no argument that judge sessions was trying to pressure him and judge sessions now but but but john sessions in making his determination following you have an injury hearing was williams suggest that the brakes and the proceeding should factor in favor of being his client being allowed to get out of his place i argued the complete opposite that mr mr lamb had every opportunity to have the benefit of consultation with his attorney they took a forty minute break in the middle of the hearing and even in the when he was on when he was cross examined at the march of two thousand and eighteen on the motion to withdraw mr land himself at the minute he understood he didn't have to plead guilty and he had every opportunity to let the judge know he didn't want to plead guilty and the record itself makes clear that mr lamb demonstrated a capacity to speak back not only to the judge but to the factual proffer that i had that i had offered in court he was able to stand up for himself in that hearing and after given every opportunity and after he was advised every right that he was waiving he made a conscious briefly this case unlike every other case i read about presents an incredibly difficult change of pl prefaced by the fact that my client didn't want to plead before he was taken to court by surprise remember that that hearing was rescheduled from august  taken directly from jail to the to the to the court he's got a few minutes to confer with counsel he tells the judge know that i literally had nothing to do with this but he sincerely believes that he did not knowingly participate in this conspiracy and i think his sincere belief is borne out by the fact that we're here today knowing that a ten year sentence is probably inconceivable if he's convicted after trial he was used not the text messages in the photos of the hearing if he was what was his response to his response was that they the that they he agreed that that's what was said but he he testified to that it wasn't talk about drugs about mr allen by the way mr allen told the court in correctly that he had received translations of those text messages by august th those text messages weren't certified until september th so his his testimony is somewhat suspect but be that as it may knowing that he's facing incredibly long prison sentence mr peralta authorized me to file this brief and to be here today and asked the court permission to allow him to