good morning your honour's good morning my pleasure my name is jason hall and i represent gary williams huffman in this case the government failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that mr hofmann exercise deficient dominion and control over the drugs discovered in a blue honda accord that was registered in the name of another individual and found in the garage of forest this for hotness first as a district court or on the asli allowed the admission of an insurance card of the insurance card was the key piece of evidence said minute by the government's the time mr hofman to the actual possession of the honda accord the testimony of the lead agent in the case was that mr  which was the which led the the agency to mr hoffman was registered in the name of earl lieberman which the the government allege was an alias the agent then testified that earle lieberman's quote unquote fishing license was discovered in the honda accord and then the government believes that the insurance card obviously was tied to mr huffman because of the connection from the fishing license back to the original truck it is mr hofmann's assertions that the insurance card was the only piece of evidence actual evidence admitted during the trial that tied him to the actual possession of the honda or the fishing license was not admitted at trial that was only the testimony of the lead agent and the lead agent when cross examined regarding the true registered owner of the vehicle the blue excuse me the blue honda accord acknowledged that it was not registered in mr h name but in the name of ethel welch a woman who is completely on associated with the case well let's assume that even if we give you that which i'm not necessarily giving in this that even if we g phrase the argument perhaps better see only credible piece of evidence first of all your honor deborah kirkman had actual possession of the honda accord at the time of trial i think it is incredibly significant that it's a honda accord did in fact belong to hoffman the government did not forfeit the honda accord now mind you the government did for fifty eight thousand dollars that was discovered actually closer than one thousand dollars discovered in the honda accord but yet at the time of trial the government did not seek to forfeit the blue honda accord and deborah kirkman was driving more over year on its efficiency the evidence is that is that is a pretty heavy rock to push at him and when you start saying things five well i think it was the only credible evidence for whatever i did jury did hear other evidence and they resolved this credibility issues the against your client which really doesn't help a sufficiency of the argument sufficiency of the evidence argument i agree your honor i am in many ways bush a opportunity before the jury in view of montana to undermine the testimony of the riaa back in which judge malloy recognized in chambers that for purposes of this case she was away from mr roscoe who had prosecuted the ca recognize that her testimony was a disaster i think the key testimony was the agent the very first person who testified and testified that the truck was registered to earl lieberman i found a fishing license in a blue honda accord and i found an insurance card time mr hopkins to the fifteen pounds of marijuana and one point five pounds of methamphetamine or over your honor i think it is significant in this case that mr hoff did not have an appropriate opportunity to further undermine the ownership issue because it is not only whether or not he had access or ownership of the vehicle but access to the honda accord and the testimony in this case was that deborah hersman had arranged with mr dickey to six one hundred four after mr huff and was arrested was driving at the time of trial and i will remind the court that her possession of the vehicle consider in applying that precedent president to your client sentenced and i know that one of the things that you talk about is his mature age as an exception to the  you're looking at an individual who's sixty years old google is sentenced to life for fifteen pounds of marijuana and a pound and a half of math and and that is certainly disproportionate to the crime of conviction now of course judgment insurance card therefore it was his car actually in the closing argument the insurance card comes of just totally in passing what the government points out is that you have three witnesses and in order for him to prevail he can only say well they're not credible three not very good witnesses you know but i think they were more than good enough and whether they're credible or not jury not that guy whether they're credible or not it is for the jury to decide we don't get to second guess that and say well i don't regular user of marijuana methamphetamine by age fifteen and and was and was using both with a friend of hers like on a regular basis and admitted she still used marijuana what was her credibility and she's have his own testimony or some other witness who said no she's a liar but then if i'm to except your argument then even if he did have a sound witnesses when i read the rewind the evidence even then well but then he has something on his side of the scale that might create reasonable doubt i'll be having that i always say is we carry way that happens when you can't you can't judge her credibility unless you can show some clear contradiction that makes a difference and he he doesn't have anything like that  so she's not the only witness on that with respect to her receiving methamphetamine marijuana and using it she's crabber a buyer for and i think a new scarlet or scarboro who testifies right before her so and then and then  she says huffman gave me methamphetamine and marijuana that very day that he was arrested and i got it out of the trunk of the car and lo and behold there is a red duffel bag in the trunk of the tar that's full of weed so found in the car i guess it's all there is to the found if it was found in a car in the defense kept objecting and they had done this on a couple previous pieces of evidence sort of a chain of custody type of jet of objection and so the prosecutor leaves a witness through ok what did excerpts a record fifty six says over ruled there's plenty of foundation so then the judge says you know maybe there's a for a one or for a two issue suggesting that you know maybe there's a relevance issue and the only relevance is this is a guy who  think that was resolved later on when they were talking about the ownership of the truck but if you want to make a for a three objection he was welcome and even in his brief he doesn't make for a three objection i mean he does say it's extremely prejudicial  judge there's plenty of foundation maybe you should raise for a one for two experts record fifty six with the defense never did well and they raise foundation again and i mean if i need to let me just point out is where it was found when it's found an insurance card something that goes with a vehicle we know it comes with the vehicle it was found in the fanny pack that also had a fishing license with his and then he did the same thing for the toyota truck they had like a drug ledger from the toyota truck that's essentially what's going on here you know if if i if i need to mouth the words harmless error i am more than happy to because it is abundantly harmless that th the truck in front of four stickies house that truck was registered to or all believe me the government in this case did not admit the fishing license that's nowhere in the record as a true document that's just