that nichols is no longer good law so there's no fee even if the answer to the first question is no but i'm not here just to save his german and his fifty dollars so i would like to address the first issue  motion to just charge us maple's or on his motion to reconsider the denial of a first request so he wasn't in the position where he could explain directly to the court why he was asking you to do documentation and it was a you know an opportunity to really explain why he wanted to represent himself and strictly speaking i don't know that specifically but hypothetically if he said i want to be i want to proceed pro se because my counsel failed to prove all my argument a reasonable conclusion or a conclusion upon which the trial court scene the character diction or inconsistency would say i'm sorry but if you're so ignorant or naive or a lawyer to think that your counsel her concern i think she said it's not exactly what i mean it's pretty close i think we ought to have him here for the hearing on this and the trial judge himself said i'm reluctant to proceed on this without him that's really the significance of this the second most of the motion to reconsider comes into play because there you have more information that this isn't just a pulling i'm concerned that i'm not getting the representation i want i don't see how i should willing to accept the conclusion dak it is permissible that it makes sense to deny the state the perineum fee in the trial court for there's no prejudice in the strictly because there was so much other evidence that this defendant did i these are not true criminal proceedings this is not a criminal conviction this is not a criminal appeal there's no affirmation of a conviction and then said if the legislature wants to it can pass legislation and the legislature passed legislation that doesn't cover everything this proceed every proceeding in juvenile court it only covered delinquency and dependency it didn't cover i'm not even sure that minors are need it talks about a twenty dollar fee per receipt and it says nothing about appeals so if it's strictly construed w w reversed a assessment of an appeal in a juvenile court case and said if the legislature wanted to assess fees which i think if they wanted to assist fees on appeal they could also say assessment of fees on any appeal from you know who are who are they could say assessment of fees on appeals from the two that they already define so into you doug it's a case where it gave the legislature an opportunity and the legislature didn't quote unquote give the state earlier that it was based upon the the holding in the rational deficit then david related to the argument on appeal that it was based upon the fact that because these defendants were indigent that should have to pay the fee and if fees would be affirmed because they were claiming they should be firm because were insurance and they also claim because williams i believe cited nichols for the proposition that the assessment of fee on mr rogers defendant had chance before this to get his own independent expert unsuccessful appeal by a convicted defendant with the idea of affirming a conviction those are the same thing and it's only the lack in which you can get to see so having said