accountable under state law for stone sakshi but what evidence is there that jackson stone had any common criminal design that night what's that evidence  himself who says that after he and carter stole the radio from gardner's van stone paged carter and the carter went to the confrontation or went to confront gardner and in so doing they brought so that evidence your honor shows that there was the petitioner was accountable for stones shooting regardless of whether they that he was accountable for stones shooting your honor moreover the evidence that stone presented he was the only shooter and so unless this was tried and accountability theory that has a court has not shooting but just present at the scene and you've got a problem well your  consistently he said that from the time of his arrest straight through his trial i take it to this day i'm really your  first your honor stone testified at his own trial and took the very same position and the jury twelve people did not believe him they could what they just took they just disbelieve the self defense part of it they obviously believe that he was the shooter you know your honor because you presented to there were two theories on the table one that he shot and intentionally which is the first degree murder the second was that his first degree murder convictions completely negated by justifiable self defense theory but the third  honor and for second degree murder all you had to say and that's all the jury had to believe was that he thought reasonably or not that he was shooting in self defense or that he was the sole shooter that the fact that he was convicted of first degree murder and not second degree murder what we each hear i'm so sorry about that but what stone said is i recall is that he fired three times and that is consistent with the e of the wounds right well no your honor again stone is testifying that he fired from the alley between twelve and twenty feet away the shell casings are in front of him between six and not just jones testimony is simply not believable on that point moreover his testimony well the one consistent thing is that he says he was the sole shooter that is consistent i was the sole shooter and it's not something i mean it came from the time of  arrest forward i mean did he want to go to jail forgot my gosh you know his testimony one is that he's the sole shooter but he's his testimony is that he  shot in self defense so whether he believed it reasonably are on reason reasonably he still protecting his brother and himself he's not taking full responsibility but moreover your honor his testimony regarding the three shots the yelling fire three shots is not has not been consistent  post conviction petition he actually says that he didn't know who was shooting when he first heard shots because he didn't know that just there was armed or shooting and that's a record so it's twenty three zero six to zero seven and the trial transcript eighty nine to ninety four your honour's so this is not a case  own family members said that carter had a gun and then no one had been recovered stone walks back from that police and he says well no i actually didn't see partner with a gun but i thought he believed the car had a gun in his pocket and moreover asked him where from where gardner the jones but your honor he also is been inconsistent about whether there's a plan to harm gardner at all on the testimony regarding what happened beforehand and what these three individuals were doing right but how does that affect the power of his testimony that he was the sole shooter which is what was excluded from not excluded but not presented at court his jones as trial well your honor the problem is is that his undercuts his reliability entirely and so to parse it out and say well maybe just the fact that he was a so shooter is credible is is simply not require is it should not have been done your honor because  verdict and he would have been peached with the fact that a jury to not believe him especially in the face of all these eyewitnesses that the jury to believe well the jury didn't believe his justification defense and convicted of first degree murder right but conviction that calls into question his testimony about being the sole shooter i think both of their convictions your honesty because that deckard stone is defending carter with the fact he's all right but his own conviction is not going to tell us anything one way or the other about whether that claim is believable but carter's conviction might yes karr's conviction does kampar that the jury believe that there were two shooters or that carter was accountable for stone and you can't extricate because this was his an accountability case at stoning carter's trial yes there was an instruction on accountability presented so the state tried the case against carter on dual theories either whether gardner weapon that night a point barely alluded to in the jones turned his closing argument the attorney gave up the ability to argue that mr snowden did it to coming out of the alley with a thirty eight caliber weapon that he  shot mr gardner because he thought mr gardner was going to shoot his brother that he fired a weapon that matched the weapon that was used to kill mr gardner and he did so out in a previous arrangement with m well let me do two things one is there was evidence that he had a gun earlier that was then stored in some point that was at the at the federal hearing but i think what counsel is alluding to is the fact that there were at least a couple of witnesses who said they saw it joan shoot so those would be people that said that jones had a weapon that night that would be basically four witnesses that were that she mentions antonio phillips and his mother are they saying that he shot through his pocket one of them i don't see one of them i think indicated they weren't sure if he shot through his pocket or not both of them what they said was that in and let's take in tonio first antonio phillips and why he's completely incredible internal phillips is the one who says that cortez jones shot from an inch away where the i think under any circumstances you don't need an expert to figure that an inch away is close range shooting and he is apparently shot from an inch away he also says did not say anything about seems stone come out of the alley and same thing with his mother renee phillips she says that cortez jones was so close that i think he took the gun at his pocket had to step back in order to shoot which also indicates he was only inches away even in the expert testimony that's mentioned in the hardest in case that the state mentioned in its original greed they say that would it would be like gunpowder or something if it was within two feet and there's no indication is that what they're talking about antonio and renee phillips is within inches and both of them don't even see stone come out of the allen and shoot so they're completely incredible i disagree with the fact that you're the guns they discharge may go backwards but factor matters is also evidence that stone was coming out of the alley when she was firing and that's probably where the ship why the shells where and where they were you also have the fact that he said it was thirty eight  which is not the right question even on direct appeal proof federal criminal conviction we're supposed to be figuring out how this works under the a t p as applied to the collateral attack of a state conviction and let me tell you my very much the case is taking