they also moved to dismiss the viable count of an indictment that had been returned prior to their kilty pleased to win information and the district court the government argued that there so now the government says well but let's go ahead and try him on those other counts which we agreed to dismantle and as to which the defendants gave full information we certainly can't allow them to now be convicted on the information that they came in complying with the kind of agreement or your honor how do you get around th indictment alleges five hundred grams for descendants in the cases where they pried to an information alleged one hundred grams certainly due process would require that we would limit future prosecution to two one hundred grams paragraph eleven of the plea agreement the parties understood that if the guilty pleas to the information should later be in cooperation the defendant has provided to the government that would be made available at the time of the sentencing had we proceeded with with other counts of the indictment  so i mean we're certainly not going to overlook the cooperation the defendant has provided are you suggesting that they would have to plead to one of them dismissed counts rather than go to trial there's always there is that language that they could continue to prosecute you that's why the specific decision was made to simply move to dismiss in that particular information and notably the government did not oppose that motion h did nothing to violate their plea agreement they did everything my client in particular cooperated for nearly five years from one nine hundred ninety nine to two thousand and four provided substantial assistance to the government not only in the territory of guam  the southern district of california as well to law enforcement investigating authorities and to now turn around and use that information against her to convict her of the additional charges which were not dismissed the money laundering charges the importation excuse me the agreement in our particular case is the specific immunity provision given by the government to my client not to prosecute her in return for her cooperation in the  northern mariana islands for any other nonviolent offenses now known to the government or which she reveals to federal authorities clearly in the five years of her cooperation she indicated you cannot bring the bell that she's already given the information and now they're trying to use that information isn't that probation all important because the plea agreement actually sense that the current will move to dismiss the other paragraph i think you would have a problem i would tend to agree with you on it but that's that's the whole nature of the cooperation provisions the immunity provisions that the government that the government regularly extends to cooperating defendants we won't prosecute that could be you know a thousand grounds i position is in order to restore the defendant to her position to give her the benefit of her bargain which you already gave in it was her cooperation that the charges should otherwise be dismissed and the government should not be permitted to violate the government who's violating the agreement at this juncture not the defendant the defendant didn't do anything wrong i found it like a rock to begin with a you very much thank you the united states supplemental memorandum file july twenty sixth two thousand and four this was in response to the excerpts of represent things would be