us a good point because that's what you told us that's the key deal as yes just from your perspective we have to figure out when that is so we can end this determine what knowledge of probable cause or reason the suspicion or whatever the officer at that point was it when he said it wasn't when he agreed to show me around i would say that the funny that is the point was the point that he agrees to show him around and given all these facts why isn't the probable cause to believe that's residents  listed residence that he wasn't there they attempted to contact the numerous times they went to the location and i think you have at least probable cause to believe that's no longer his residence so then the officer checks the record finds out well in a previous residence he goes there  he appears to be exercising dominion and control so at the point he says sure i'll show you around i mean isn't it reasonable that point for somebody to assume well this is his residence and if that's the case then they have probable cause to that it is that is reasonable to conclude that this would be something that would be in that subject knology the officer stated that neither of those two telephonic context were locked into that subject in after the hearing revealed that that was simply not the case and none of the items that were described in the laundry tickets that were in the bag for mr bush worth had even been picked up by the time all three of the hearing it's our position that that casts a significant doubt on the testimony of door he there's no dispute that he's apparently smell of marijuana i'm not mistaken and the officer testifies that he did he looked around and then he said show me your room specific dates in which the fourth fifth the calls were made that again seems to be those are great arguments for the trial court there's no question about it yes and again you are being our position listened to minutes to like get the time that's fine thank you required to visit with the probation or two to three times a month this individual had a fixed problematic track record leading up to the juncture of the search that occurred that  he previously been revote in march of that year about four months prior to this this search officer inherited this case from another officer there were there was information mr bush from time to time at the residence that he had listed on this program probation officer off the ground had made reasonable efforts to try to locate mr brown at the delisted address other or every other reasonable option he had to locate him and his answers interests at that point he had arguably reasonable suspicion to believe he would be if the apple want to address when he indeed found mr bush just at the a point that the threshold of the door when he directed him to his room that would have been probable cause at that point the government's in that what do you make of all the evidence of drycleaning hotly contested i would characterize it as at the district for both before the matches and later to some extent before the district judge it went to the magistrate judge twice is that correct after they found the evidence of dry  issued a and a supplemental report recommendation and then the matter it was addressed by the district judge who  to that extent and that this was either a bruise or a deception to keep the probation officer from investigating the true residence of mr bush that that that was actually placed on the record by the district judge so the credibility  i would characterize the search as having actually commands when the officer officer brown began physically opening drawers looking for contraband after having his background was that he knew that throughout almost the entirety of the period of supervision that mr brown mr bush that is had lived at this afa want to address that he had he knew that the prior probation officer had had difficulty in locating mr bush at the census address where a third party has sent a letter in june probation officers to the probation officer saying that mr bush was living there that was in a letter from mr bush himself and he knew that he was he himself that is also brown it had difficulty in finding given juncture for officer brown to have found will probably be pretty hard to say at least my perspective that when he arrived at the door the knocking at the door that he had probable cause to believe that  surveillance conducted on day individuals had been seen going into those houses in the most of those cases individual had been seen with their own keys so again i believe that that's a critical point to keep in mind in