the district court sentenced mr smith to a term of twenty four months off the low end of the range recommended by which it was in light of those facts and the possibility that a collateral not particularly disturbed about that i would certainly place in the court that we would consult with her and to advise her and then let her decide well just freaking for myself i'm a little i'm a little concerned because of the editor's requirements  know accordance with the practice of my office to immediately send out all orders to come in out of the clients even before they come to me attorney i assumed it was done it was not done which i didn't notice until i got the order from this court saying show up and explain why you didn't do it and then i went back and probably didn't know in a timely manner was when it was due i did send the order as soon as i got this court's order explained to him when the brief was you but i have been he has been asking me and i have been sending him parts of the record ever appointed in this matter i also discussed the case with him after i filed my appeal i will attempt to talk to him again i've tried to contact him but you know that that takes time and i will make sure that that's what he wants me to do but those are my instructions after i apparently  conspiracy count and aiding and abetting count he was found guilty on the conspiracy count and not guilty on the other counts somewhat interesting conclusion by the jury number of cautionary instructions i think it's tempting to help the jury separate mr smith case the evidence that went to him from the evidence that went to his co defendants by far the vast clients and your client provided the so called trust structure to use the money that had been accumulated by the other defendants and move them about the trust  position because we are not sure what she would want to do and under am lean to read and make a decision the first question is does the defendant we wish to have reviewed why don't i assume for purposes of this argument that she does and then we can address the second issue well actually in her ganders brief her counsel basically said that she didn't really want to have the case really ended although she wasn't discussing booker or the risk from evidence that's clearly not relevant to a defendant instance fairly minimal and the district court did carefully give cautionary instructions also the defendant says that there was evidence of his co defendants radical tax protester cashier's check payable to your realm his trust company that money is deposited into the west wind account can smith take that money and use it as a check for fourteen thousand five hundred dollars to pay automated equipment for the purchase of a high grow extract or for the last day laundromat the other important part of the night with a cashier's check for about thirty four thousand dollars the other portion of that money is factors i can't give you any lower threatens and still meet the requirements of those factors and those are the exact factors that the court after booker said the courts are allowed to look at i think the decision to the guy are allowed but not require i believe the court has to consider the thirty five fifty to be a factors not the time and must consider the sentencing guidelines does not need to follow the don't think that that is actually in the record