informed of the mandatory minimum sentence prior to and in fact during the flea collar quickly the problem in this case is the missed information unintentionally conveyed by the district court determine what the sentence was that the sentence could in fact the lower than the guidelines and she said that twice all these things were relevant to the sentence but as long as she would have told him could be lower than the guidelines but it can't go below one hundred twenty months from the government knowing that the government is to the adversary and knowing you know that the government is interested in getting him high sentence that's why the government's their initial approach that we had as the government is saying this is take your point that it's not clear from the record that he ever understood the mandatory minimum that we still have to go to the second thing is whether he would have you know but for that that turned every one of these cases that would be a person a involuntary plea and i don't think that's the law but maybe you can explain in the why how you get from the violation to the involuntary ness and choices and making the plea either i wasn't clear i understand what real lemon says but you're telling me i don't really i'm not really making a rule eleven claim but i am but in addition to my voluntary claim and so we don't have to get to the second part about substantial rights and whether it's whether we have pled guilty anyway as i understood your argument you're saying he didn't have the full deck in front of him as to the consequences therefore it was involuntary is that your argument ok so then my question is doesn't that argument turn every ruhleben violation with respect to the only or to put in either the mentoring minimum warm for of the family and has found that sometimes pleas are not voluntary if the defendant's not given proper information about the consequences of the plea just by the fact that it's also i think i can short circuit this maybe not but i think the answer to the judge nuclear arms race sensible question think or what is most closely resembles yours i'm thinking of chuy's and b hunter comes to mind which was an involuntary plea based on what the defense attorney found a knife a table packaging materials and harold and in the same room on the floor the gun was wrapped in a white cloth with the ammunition on top i don't have time to fully argue this but i ten year mandatory minimum and also failing to inform him about the drug quantity and finding that the council was going to affect it for not pursuing that adjustment for safety valve i'd like to take those in order with respect to the first issue the record is clear that measured straight judge went on to the next the next topic if you well and that is the other rights and and the government here is not defending that the government is acknowledging that that was a ruhleben violation the pre sentence report itself listed the existence of a ten year mandatory minimum six times and that was fully translated for him and sentencing i point out at sentencing itself the court talked about the mandatory minimum as did the u s attorney magistrate judge said to him directly you understand that the judge when he finally posts sounds may go below the mandatory minimum you understand that he says yes if that was the case would this be that basis do you choose to plead guilty do you understand yes and i just plead guilty that's the only exchange is that an involuntary plea i would say no you're  court to go above below or or within the guidelines the court was obliged to do that by rule eleven itself and we saw i think the section in there it was right and i don't understand where you're going with this are you telling me now the magistrate judge did not make a mistake i so and in fact no parties at that that police were in a position to do so only the district court was in a position to exercise discretion to give us a you know you'd have to i have a ph d in linguistics to understand all that understand that very well and you understand he will consider the range in deciding what sense don't post you understand that i didn't understand that very well so he's the problem is now he says look th there's mandatory minimum here and it's one hundred twenty months you might also have some factors or some specific characteristics that permit the judge to go under that we don't know that that's a and the magistrates and the judges to make sure that they check all of these things are this one is more troubling because other discussion swims around in the guidelines and so i take your point you're saying well he has to know about the mandatory minimum because of the plea agreement and the pre sentence report is that correct he does right and is there anywhere else for he's advised of the mandatory minimum well at the initial keep that in mind i would just i would just point out that i believe that if the judge had left out any other advice means to him i think that would have probably been an error here because he would have not met the requirements of rule eleven feet one am a council could not prevail and therefore his decision just she declared not to have to pursue that particular argument was not the fish and even if he had he would not have prevailed for all the same reasons and therefore the prejudice prong number one he did it the record is clear that he did understand he was told so many times that he never moved to withdraw his plea even after he was in even after that the mandatory minimum was imposed he never moved to any