that there was a client communication problem whatever you want to call it and it put the i j a in the position of you know how many continuances is enough and at what point do i simply say to her it's time to go to court here going to get a new lawyer he better be prepared to proceed with the hearing two months later and it was in fact the evidence suggests to me that he kind of dragged his feet on finding another lawyer counsel she did try to obtain your counsel i contacted has a chameleon august fourteenth that's the first time he had a legal screening with our firm and then again on august twenty first for obvious reasons your honor our agency has many goes on if we can get a thirty day continuance to in order to review everything that had been submitted so far and possibly perhaps supplement that record well and nobody is is faulty you did what any competent lawyer would do you're not going to jump into a case that you don't have adequate time to prepare for but the question that i'm wrestling with is why was it in a legal error for the immigration judge on this record faced with a number of prior continuances faced with clear evidence that the client and the attorney were not getting along in light of a warning to the client that you've got to be prepared to go at the next date that i'm saddened here and then the client comes in to us from comes in and he's not ready it's not your fault or the fault of the wall office that you represent the fault lies with the client and at what point do we say to these immigration judges enough is to relate that former person that persecution suffered in former yugoslavia he makes a reference that based on those times she noticed actually needed to have some type of psychological evaluation and that's why he was not able to assist her properly at that is six weeks before the scheduled hearing no you're on our director does not reflect that he got that he got notice of the fact the record only reflects that on august fifth the lawyer former counsel sent a letter to was counsel of record she had no prior notice as far as the record shows if there was any outside information going on it's impossible for us to tell at this point in time so even if you find that immigration judge could not have acted more like a prosecutor in this instance he acted so much as a prosecutor that by the end of the proceedings the government counsel didn't have a single question to ask being introduce a single piece of paper to controvert any aspect  the medical report i would offer to you is that it's meant to corroborate physical evidence of petitioners on injuries that may be the reason why he leading mention anything about to the examining physician and also the withdraw for the more reasonable fact finder would not be compelled on this record to find the petitioner credible and like to turn first to the question of the right to counsel if i may  first of all a couple things i'd like to clean up in terms of the factual record in march of two thousand and two there was an immigration hearing at that hearing counsel for that for petitioner inform were problems dealing with the petitioner that he was not cooperating that he would come to meetings and leave after a few minutes and that they had not been able to develop the case i believe from the from what the march two thousand to hearing was after the psychological exam examination so it wasn't just a question that he's a psychological problems we're preventing sort of communication cooperation this this this went beyond that at that hearing the i specifically warned the petitioner that he needed to cooperate with his attorney in a position agreed and there was some discussion that if there are there will continue to be disputes petitioner's lawyer might have to withdraw so he's put on notice petitioner to withdraw so he was at least on notice that she was thinking of drawing at that point then we have the august fifth letter of two thousand to which she informs us that they had made a meeting at the end of july to discuss handing over the file shows a continuing lack of cooperation on the part of the petitioner and then nine weeks two months over two months before his merits hearing his attorney moves to be withdrawn from the case of the petitioner knows that there's no indication that he was given he he received that letter from his attorney and then the order granting that motion to get a copy of the motion you know that was it was  was informed that he had to update his address if you did move now that it's not clear whether or not that was because the address it simply says in the form that it wasn't it wasn't deliverable but that's just another piece of the puzzle but here th hearing or something that there's an august twenty six which is the marriage in august sixteenth i believe is the day is the day that he meets with it is i think is the day that his motion for a continuance is denied and then sometime in august he meets with of that that was what what was returned back to the executive office of immigration still on the on august sixteenth did he show up at a hearing on august sixty no i'll just twenty six he had he had moved on his own on august sixteenth with continuous to for to get july because there's an august fifth letter from his former counsel saying she tried to return a copy of the record on july thirtieth she wasn't there but her but her partner was in an associate in the office was there and he refused to take it knew for certain at the end of june he knew that his counsel was contemplating withdrawing country but when he knew that he did not have a lawyer that she had been relieved when did you know that i think the record we would we argue that is not abuse of discretion to deny this forth continues after the thing continues continuances grand including the one in march and at that hearing the to the petitioner had been warned that he needed bar that i don't know your honor i soon i assume so but i don't know for sure we don't have to be a member of our records before the immigration court so i don't know the answer is never problems that he was experiencing at the time and i also like to point out how do we know there were is that in the records on page three fifty seven your honor i believe that there's a psychological report indicating that he's suffering from  is on page one of six on line eleven she says it was very difficult to get the information and with him and this is one of the reasons we sent him to the clinical psychologist and who also agreed in fact and that's why she was interrupted by the happened to him he states i try not to think about it i try not to feel bad so these points in the ability to really think about what happened to him that's why he's having the problems communicating what exactly happened to him indicate that his indigent thank you yes no money without money would have been very difficult for him to just run out and get any attorney out of the phone book and say come to court to me in twenty days that's why he had to rely on nonprofit