twenty one the judge said it was october in the same page and defense counsel then said that thirty days from october eighth  didn't direct otherwise rule two two seventy deals with when judgments become final and this is really one that that answers the answers a question it needs years but really the issue isn't the right to appeal once it goes past ninety days and we don't have to have an actual keeping people locked up in prison for sixty years to commit the crime the whole point of this whole statutory structure is when something important comes up like the recantation of the states  court witnesses on the stand they can look at to determine whether they're telling the truth and with the law it's not something to be determined here and it should be sent back for that purpose so if the defendant is given a go this he loses his or the right to that he doesn't realize that there was really the there was a fundamental problem with the order of the first place the judge perhaps you could say recognize that the order was void and abandoned and it sounds like what you're saying is the fact that the pretrial but when it came to trial they decided not to present this evidence for one reason or another so the prosecutor said something like that in closing argument but when you go back and look at the trial you do this is to have been a testimony about it in the act that addresses what you do when this happens if you look at the language that the judge had to decide that the that the order has to be entered within thirty days that mandatory data redemption needs to be ordered was directly and that just didn't notice given in ten days was directory and part of that was looking at the fact that there is no punishment given within the act for what happens if that is not done there is a bit more punishment if the judge does not answer that word by the city days they weren't there was no statutory provision allowing them to have given them that right but i think what they were trying to do is as your in your honor mentioned the applicable relief we realize you didn't get your right to appeal we're going to try to rectify that now by allowing you there with there were quite a few mistakes made along the way that it would be very disingenuous to say that there is not fundamental fairness here however there is also not the language in the act al sure where the date was that everyone was using for the denial of the petition for leave to appeal i don't know what compelled me to look it up but the supreme court  leave to appeal  i don't think so you don't have a direct quote but i believe they were discussing any position filed after the original dismissal isn't really fair to show that must conform to the time limitations and they mentioned the different times of when they have to be within ten days twelve this is ok but after ninety days under the scheme of the post conviction that it's too late because those two the defendant petition that maybe they blocked him copying from another motion i have no idea when that the state is correct that the statute of limitations should have really expired as far as i can see i don't have his fourth before the filing of the original one but they didn't argue that they are here in their motion to their time in this motion their motion to dismiss this that it expired after the final of the original one before they were columns successes so they the state court didn't just come up with this procedure the court adopted the suggestion of the state in the middle of the here wasn't the judge's idea of resistance idea course but i don't remember