guideline range after considering the circumstances of the defendant's particular underlying kidnapping conviction the peers the district court was concerned because he did not feel the  the guidelines as what kid where kidnapping lives the government's position is that the two thousand and one amendments have addressed the court's concern now we no longer the amendment is what you think answers the question yes your honor although the court did consider sanchez rodriguez and certainly sanchez rodriguez case does allow departures based on extraordinary circumstances that make a render prior kidnapping conviction a typical from a typical kidnapping conviction again i would point out to the court though that that case was decided prior to the two thousand and one amendments which now take care of those concerns and placed aggravated compare the convictions and certain positions to be considered as to which are more serious but i would invite the court to look at the circumstances of that it was a domestic violence situation in which the mother of the child had indicated the defendant had beaten her in the past defendant and method that he had had her in the california and california but there was concern about this being an abusive situation and the child being taken and crying leaving the babysitter crying to go with this defendant that was your argument that even if the court could look because of the prior case that it still does not it's it's it's not any technical kidnapping does exactly right or and that is the government's position and that would be the argument that the eight level departure under the circumstances of this particular the amendments to the guidelines it's our position that the amendments to the guidelines didn't trump the interest rogering so they don't try whether or not a court needs to look at does this case fall within the heartland of cases that the commission needs to look to and it's scans so judge quackenbush looked at this and determined that the child was taken for the purpose of the defendant being able to speak to the mother there was no harm to the child and after a child was found later on that day asleep in the defendant this was a situation where this gentleman the defendant has basically raised this child a child i think was five years old and that these two people the mother and the defendant have been in a long term relationship and the child gentleman was a father figure to this child so it was very it's very different than a situation where for example let's say a stranger kidnapping that was not the case sometimes just one person saying this happened in another person saying that happened in the record doesn't support any allegations of physical violence or any proof of any of them right but in california well in the times i guess i guess what i want where i would be struggling is you know i'm not i'm not particularly persuaded by the fact that there's not violence in this situation just because i know we all read about newspaper every time people t own children and take out the whole family and so just because it's a family member in a domestic situation you know that that under the abuse of discretion standard that's that's were i'm wondering you know to what think that thing is that it's our position that the trial court judge looked at all of these factors made a decision that this was the appropriate thing to do and that he did not abused his discretion and making th exactly there are any other questions from i don't think so thank you very much indicated to this time was while i do think that domestic violence is not something to be taken lightly and i do think that you know i read a newspaper all the time people take the whole families out so i'm not necessarily less concerned because it's someone that you know that or that you can understand that they're not going to do any harm but if you haven't talked to them you know and you know what with the kind of plan through or if you didn't get the attention that by the was found on these this federal conviction on this federal charge while he was in and jail serving time on a violation of a supervised release on this kidnapping conviction so i'm not i do not know what that is what occurred i don't know if it's a violation of paying a fine or if you're trying to contact defendant are to contact the victim but it would be the government's position that in looking at the totality of the circumstances and this particular kidnapping conviction