factors under thirty five fifty three and in sentencing the store herrera to two hundred ten months in prison the case arises out of a series of drug transactions what is particularly important in this case is that each and every one of the drug transactions which began not concerning the the mule transactions for he allegedly delivered four pounds and two ounces on behalf of mr lee those not been part of the case because those are such significantly larger amounts of drugs than we were talking about the individual some sort of count if that information had not been presented to the jury because it was part of a different conspiracy that would have had a profound effect on his ability to argue the sentencing entrapment argument that we did argue to the jury but it's sort of it's a big pink elephant in the corner of the room all of the conspirators that were named by the government the success of any one of their ventures is supposed to be interrelated there is no showing that the success of mr nice participation in this conspiracy has any dependence was to wear on the success of mr humana as our mr lea involves these other people and that allow the government to bring in the testimony regarding the four pounds that mr legal says mr her ever delivered to him and carson seen in the end the additional two ounces both of which occurred after the drug deals with the undercover agent had stopped and it is because of that that it matters how we kind of figure this conspiracy or conspiracies i submit in point of fact that the evidence presented to the jury in this case actually supports the finding of three separate conspiracy yes people knew each other but we don't it's like riding pants it's hard to define the exact parameters of it but in this case i think it's crucial that each and every drug deal in the behavior of my client in this case each and every time was at the behest of the undercover officer at no time and we've al that's the problem i had with judge mckibben giving the traditional entrapment instruction particularly when he says the reluctant reluctance of the defendant is the most important factor because this qualitatively different mr herrera was not entrapped into selling drugs in the traditional sense of there was no entrapment as to the particular sale so that it seems to me that you can't everything that you could possibly want in the way of instruction with respect to the issue of what the jury has to find the under reasonable doubt post a deal like he got it is the presumed in addition to the fact that he cooperated that that sentence is reasonable under the thirty five fifty three factors the mere fact that my client went to trial as opposed to cooperating shouldn't warrant a sentence that is four times what a large drug dealer received nor four times what his girlfriend received because she testified i'm done thank you thank you model instruction court uses which is eight point one eight it states that a conspiracy may continue for a long period of time and they include the performance of many transactions i think that's what was going on here this could be charged as one and was charged as will which is and i think again that's typical of an enterprise type conspiracy it's almost like arguing that the ninth circuit must be more than one court because judge fisher may not know some of your which is not the both of whom work with and through the defendant in this case herrera i think that's typical of the drug enterprise now i suppose what what the defense arguing here is that this should have financially or any other way to the one with  that way and the question is does that matter it was charged against al know he goes out and finds them well whatever they're available there appear to be two sources but i don't think they're necessarily competing with each other and you have a fairly confined conspiracy here in terms of  what i think i have to concede that you're gonna guess so i mean against your enterprise theory really good and sort of any moment you may be going to one group as opposed to the younger and they both have an economic interest  is started and involves five factors and i think this case it's well within all of them it's time period and this spans approximately five and a half months if you look at the case the instruction relies on it's united states together it's the reno carson city area in nevada none of the four locations where drugs are sold are more than forty three miles apart from each other you look at the number of people under the broadest take